Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
skip to main content
research-article
Open access

Human-Collective Collaborative Target Selection

Published: 27 March 2021 Publication History

Abstract

Robotic collectives are composed of hundreds or thousands of distributed robots using local sensing and communication that encompass characteristics of biological spatial swarms, colonies, or a combination of both. Interactions between the individual entities can result in emergent collective behaviors. Human operators in future disaster response or military engagement scenarios are likely to deploy semi-autonomous collectives to gather information and execute tasks within a wide area, while reducing the exposure of personnel to danger. This article presents and evaluates two action selection models in an experiment consisting of a single human operator supervising four simulated collectives. The action selection models have two parts: (1) a best-of-n decision-making model that attempts to choose the highest-quality target from a set of n targets and (2) a quorum sensing task sequencing model that enables autonomous target site occupation. An original biologically inspired insect colony decision model is compared to a bias-reducing model that attempts to reduce environmental bias, which can negatively influence collective best-of-n decisions when poorer-quality targets are easier to evaluate than higher-quality targets. The collective decision-making models are compared in both supervised and unsupervised trials. The bias-reducing model without human supervision is slower than the original model but is 57% more accurate for decisions where evaluating the optimal target is more difficult. Human-collective teams using the bias-reducing model require less operator influence and achieve 25% higher accuracy with difficult decisions compared to the teams using the original model.

References

[1]
Julie A. Adams, Jessie Y. C. Chen, and Michael A. Goodrich. 2018. Swarm transparency. In Companion of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI’18). ACM, New York, NY, 45--46.
[2]
Farshad Arvin, Ali Emre Turgut, Farhad Bazyari, Kutluk Bilge Arikan, Nicola Bellotto, and Shigang Yue. 2014. Cue-based aggregation with a mobile robot swarm: A novel fuzzy-based method. Adaptive Behavior 22, 3 (2014), 189--206.
[3]
C. C. Ashcraft, M. A. Goodrich, and J. W. Crandall. 2019. Moderating operator influence in human-swarm systems. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC’19). 4275--4282.
[4]
Manuele Brambilla, Eliseo Ferrante, Mauro Birattari, and Marco Dorigo. 2013. Swarm robotics: A review from the swarm engineering perspective. Swarm Intelligence 7, 1 (2013), 1--41.
[5]
Daniel S. Brown, Michael A. Goodrich, Shin-Young Jung, and Sean Kerman. 2016. Two invariants of human-swarm interaction. Journal of Human Robot Interaction 5, 1 (2016), 1--31.
[6]
Alexandre Campo, Simon Garnier, Olivier Dédriche, Mouhcine Zekkri, and Marco Dorigo. 2011. Self-organized discrimination of resources. PLoS One 6, 5 (May 2011), 1--7.
[7]
Daniel Carrillo-Zapata, Emma Milner, Julian Hird, Georgios Tzoumas, Paul J. Vardanega, Mahesh Sooriyabandara, Manuel Giuliani, Alan F. T. Winfield, and Sabine Hauert. 2020. Mutual shaping in swarm robotics: User studies in fire and rescue, storage organization, and bridge inspection. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 7 (2020), 53.
[8]
Edward A. Codling, Michael J. Plank, and Simon Benhamou. 2008. Random walk models in biology. Journal of the Royal Society Interface 5, 25 (2008), 813--834.
[9]
Jason R. Cody. 2018. Discrete Consensus Decisions in Human-Collective Teams. Ph.D. Dissertation. Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
[10]
Jason R. Cody and Julie A. Adams. 2017. An evaluation of quorum sensing mechanisms in collective value-sensitive site selection. In Proceedings of the 2017 International Symposium on Multi-Robot and Multi-Agent Systems (MRS’17). 40--47.
[11]
Jason R. Cody and Julie A. Adams. 2017. Reducing distance bias in value-sensitive swarm site selection. In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Swarm Behavior and Bio-Inspired Robots. 223--230.
[12]
Giles Coppin and François Legras. 2012. Autonomy spectrum and performance perception issues in swarm supervisory control. Proceedings of the IEEE 100, 3 (March 2012), 590--603.
[13]
Iain D. Couzin, Jens Krause, Nigel R. Franks, and Simon A. Levin. 2005. Effective leadership and decision-making in animal groups on the move. Nature 433, 1 (2005), 513--516.
[14]
Jacob W. Crandall, Nathan Anderson, Chace Ashcraft, John Grosh, Jonah Henderson, Joshua McClellan, Aadesh Neupane, and Michael A. Goodrich. 2017. Human-swarm interaction as shared control: Achieving flexible fault-tolerant systems. In Engineering Psychology and Cognitive Ergonomics: Performance, Emotion and Situation Awareness, Don Harris (Ed.). Springer International, 266--284.
[15]
Mica R. Endsley. 1995. Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors 37, 1 (1995), 32--64.
[16]
Nigel R. Franks, Stephen C. Pratt, Eamon B. Mallon, Nicholas F. Britton, and David J. T. Sumpter. 2002. Information flow, opinion polling and collective intelligence in house-hunting social insects. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 357, 1427 (2002), 1567--1583.
[17]
Simon Garnier, Jacques Gautrais, Masoud Asadpour, Christian Jost, and Guy Theraulaz. 2009. Self-organized aggregation triggers collective decision making in a group of cockroach-like robots. Adaptive Behavior 17, 2 (2009), 109--133.
[18]
Michael A. Goodrich, P. B. Sujit, Sean Kerman, Brian Pendleton, and Josè Pinto. 2011. Enabling Human Interaction with Bio-Inspired Robot Teams: Topologies, Leaders, Predators, and Stakeholders. Technical Report 2011-1. Human Centered Machine Intelligence Laboratory, Brigham Young University, Provo, UT.
[19]
Musad Haque, Christopher Ren, Electa Baker, Douglas Kirkpatrick, and Julie A. Adams. 2016. Analysis of swarm communication models. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Combinations of Intelligent Methods and Applications. 29--37.
[20]
Curtis M. Humphrey. 2009. Information Abstraction Visualization for Human-Robot Interaction. Ph.D. Dissertation. Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN.
[21]
Jules Hurst. 2017. Robotic swarms in offensive maneuver. Joint Force Quarterly 87 (Oct. 2017), Article 1326017.
[22]
Shin-Young Jung, Daniel S. Brown, and Michael A. Goodrich. 2013. Shaping Couzin-like torus swarms through coordinated mediation. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. 1834--1839.
[23]
Shin-Young Jung and Michael A. Goodrich. 2013. Multi-robot perimeter-shaping through mediator-based swarm control. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Robotics. 1--6.
[24]
Asaad Kaadan, Hazem H. Refai, and Peter G. LoPresti. 2014. Multielement FSO transceivers alignment for inter-UAV communications. Journal of Lightwave Technology 32, 24 (Dec. 2014), 4785--4795.
[25]
Zsolt Kira and Mitchell A. Potter. 2009. Exerting human control over decentralized robot swarms. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Robots. 566--571.
[26]
Andreas Kolling, Katia Sycara, Steven Nunnally, and Michael Lewis. 2013. Human-swarm interaction: An experimental study of two types of interaction with foraging swarms. Journal of Human Robot Interaction 2, 2 (2013), 103--129.
[27]
Andreas Kolling, Phillip Walker, Nilanjan Chakraborty, Katia Sycara, and Michael Lewis. 2016. Human interaction with robot swarms: A survey. IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems 46, 1 (Feb. 2016), 9--26.
[28]
Arun K. Majumdar. 2015. Free-Space Optical (FSO) Platforms: Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) and Mobile. Springer, New York, NY, 203--225.
[29]
Eamonn B. Mallon, Stephen C. Pratt, and Nigel R. Franks. 2001. Individual and collective decision-making during nest site selection by the ant Leptothorax albipennis. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 50, 4 (2001), 352--359.
[30]
Drone Business Marketer. 2017. 13 Best Drones with the Longest Flight Time—2018 Buyer’s Guide. Retrieved January 28, 2021 from https://dronebusinessmarketer.com/best-drones-with-longest-flight-time/.
[31]
Francesco Mondada, Michael Bonani, Xavier Raemy, James Pugh, Christopher Cianci, Adam Klaptocz, Stephane Magnenat, Jean-Christophe Zufferey, Dario Floreano, and Alcherio Martinoli. 2009. The e-puck, a robot designed for education in engineering. In Proceedings of the Conference on Autonomous Robot Systems and Competitions, Paulo J. S. Gonçalves, Paulo J. D. Torres, and Carlos M. O. Alves (Eds.), Vol. 1. IPCB: Instituto Politécnico de Castelo Branco, Castelo Branco, Portugal, 59--65. http://www.est.ipcb.pt/robotica2009/.
[32]
Marco A. Montes de Oca, Eliseo Ferrante, Alexander Scheidler, Carlo Pinciroli, Mauro Birattari, and Marco Dorigo. 2011. Majority-rule opinion dynamics with differential latency: A mechanism for self-organized collective decision-making. Swarm Intelligence 5, 3--4 (2011), 305--327.
[33]
Sasanka Nagavalli, Nilanjan Chakraborty, and Katia Sycara. 2017. Automated sequencing of swarm behaviors for supervisory control of robotic swarms. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA’17).
[34]
Darren Pais, Patrick M. Hogan, Thomas Schlegel, Nigel R. Franks, Naomi E. Leonard, and James A. R. Marshall. 2013. A mechanism for value-sensitive decision-making. PLoS One 8, 9 (2013), 1--9.
[35]
Raja Parasuraman, Thomas B. Sheridan, and Christopher D. Wickens. 2000. A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics—Part A: Systems and Humans 30, 3 (May 2000), 286--297.
[36]
Chris A. C. Parker and Hong Zhang. 2009. Cooperative decision-making in decentralized multiple-robot systems: The best-of-N problem. IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics 14, 2 (2009), 240--251.
[37]
Chris A. C. Parker and Hong Zhang. 2010. Collective unary decision-making by decentralized multiple-robot systems applied to the task-sequencing problem. Swarm Intelligence 4, 3 (2010), 199--220.
[38]
Michael Peters, Bruno Laeng, Kerry Latham, Marla Jackson, Raghad Zaiyouna, and Chris Richardson. 1995. A redrawn Vandenberg and Kuse mental rotations test—different versions and factors that affect performance. Brain and Cognition 28, 1 (1995), 39--58.
[39]
Judhi Prasetyo, Giulia De Masi, and Eliseo Ferrante. 2019. Collective decision making in dynamic environments. Swarm Intelligence 13, 3--4 (2019), 217--243.
[40]
Andreagiovanni Reina, Marco Dorigo, and Vito Trianni. 2014. Towards a cognitive design pattern for collective decision-making. In Swarm Intelligence. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 8667. Springer, 194--205.
[41]
Andreagiovanni Reina, Roman Miletitch, Marco Dorigo, and Vito Trianni. 2015. A quantitative micro--macro link for collective decisions: The shortest path discovery/selection example. Swarm Intelligence 9, 2--3 (2015), 75--102.
[42]
Andreagiovanni Reina, Gabriele Valentini, Cristian Fernández-Oto, Marco Dorigo, and Vito Trianni. 2015. A design pattern for decentralised decision making. PLoS One 10, 10 (2015), 1--18.
[43]
Karina A. Roundtree, Jason R. Cody, Jennifer Leaf, H. Onan Demirel, and Julie A. Adams. 2019. Visualization design for human-collective teams. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 67th Annual Meeting. 417--421.
[44]
Michael Rubenstein, Christian Ahler, and Radhika Nagpal. 2012. Kilobot: A low cost scalable robot system for collective behaviors. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 3293--3298.
[45]
Erol Şahin. 2005. Swarm robotics: From sources of inspiration to domains of application. In Swarm Robotics. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 3342. Springer, 10--20.
[46]
Ozgur Koray Sahingoz. 2014. Networking models in flying ad-hoc networks (FANETs): Concepts and challenges. Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems 74, 1 (April 2014), 513--527.
[47]
Paul Scharre. 2014. Robotics on the battlefield part II: The coming swarm. Center for a New American Security. Retrieved January 28, 2021 from https://www.cnas.org/publications/reports/robotics-on-the-battlefield-part-ii-the-coming-swarm.
[48]
Alexander Scheidler, Arne Brutschy, Eliseo Ferrante, and Marco Dorigo. 2016. The k-unanimity rule for self-organized decision-making in swarms of robots. IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics 46, 5 (2016), 1175--1188.
[49]
Thomas Schmickl and Karl Crailsheim. 2008. Trophallaxis within a robotic swarm: Bio-inspired communication among robots in a swarm. Autonomous Robots 25, 1 (2008), 171--188.
[50]
Thomas Seeley, P. Kirk Visscher, Thomas Schlegl, Patrick M. Hogan, Nigel R. Franks, and James A. R. Marshall. 2012. Stop signals provide cross inhibition in collective decision-making by honey bee swarms. Science 335 (Aug. 2012), 108--111.
[51]
Thomas D. Seeley and P. Kirk Visscher. 2004. Quorum sensing during nest-site selection by honeybee swarms. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 56, 6 (Oct. 2004), 594--601.
[52]
Stephen J. Selcon, Ronald M. Taylor, and E. Koritsas. 1991. Workload or situational awareness? TLX vs. SART for aerospace systems design evaluation. In Proceedings of the Human Factors Society Annual Meeting, Vol. 35. SAGE Publications, Los Angeles, CA, 62--66.
[53]
Mohamed S. Talamali, James A. R. Marshall, Thomas Bose, and Andreagiovanni Reina. 2019. Improving collective decision accuracy via time-varying cross-inhibition. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA’19).
[54]
Gabriele Valentini. 2017. Achieving Consensus in Robot Swarms: Design and Analysis of Strategies for the Best-of-n Problem. Springer International.
[55]
Gabriele Valentini, Eliseo Ferrante, and Marco Dorigo. 2017. The best-of-n problem in robot swarms: Formalization, state of the art, and novel perspectives. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 4 (2017), 9.
[56]
Gabriele Valentini, Heiko Hamann, and Marco Dorigo. 2014. Self-organized collective decision making: The weighted voter model. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems. 45--52.
[57]
Gabriele Valentini, Heiko Hamann, and Marco Dorigo. 2015. Efficient decision-making in a self-organizing robot swarm: On the speed versus accuracy trade-off. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems. 1305--1314.
[58]
Steven G. Vandenberg and Allan R. Kuse. 1978. Mental rotations, a group test of three-dimensional spatial visualization. Perceptual and Motor Skills 47, 2 (1978), 599--604.
[59]
Phillip Walker, Steven Nunnally, Michael Lewis, Nilanjan Chakraborty, and Katia Sycara. 2014. Levels of automation for human influence of robot swarms. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonimics Society Annual Meeting.
[60]
P. Walker, S. Nunnally, M. Lewis, A. Kolling, N. Chakraborty, and K. Sycara. 2012. Neglect benevolence in human control of swarms in the presence of latency. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC’12). 3009--3014.
[61]
Jan Wessnitzer and Chris Melhuish. 2003. Collective decision-making and behaviour transitions in distributed ad hoc wireless networks of mobile robots: Target-hunting. In Advances in Artificial Life. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2801. Springer, 893--902. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-39432-7_96
[62]
Robert Wood, Radhika Nagpal, and Gu-Yeon Wei. 2013. Flight of the Robobees. Scientific American. Retrieved January 28, 2021 from https://ssr.seas.harvard.edu/files/sciam2013-robobee.pdf.

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)A Taxonomy of Robot Autonomy for Human-Robot InteractionProceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610977.3634993(381-393)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
  • (2024)The effect of uneven and obstructed site layouts in best-of-NSwarm Intelligence10.1007/s11721-024-00236-9Online publication date: 7-Mar-2024
  • (2023)Measuring Human-Robot Team Benefits Under Time Pressure in a Virtual Reality Testbed2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)10.1109/IROS55552.2023.10341794(5410-5417)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction
ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction  Volume 10, Issue 2
June 2021
195 pages
EISSN:2573-9522
DOI:10.1145/3450361
Issue’s Table of Contents
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 27 March 2021
Accepted: 01 December 2020
Revised: 01 September 2020
Received: 01 April 2020
Published in THRI Volume 10, Issue 2

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. Human-swarm interaction
  2. collective decision making
  3. swarm intelligence

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed

Funding Sources

  • US Office of Naval Research Awards

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)135
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)15
Reflects downloads up to 22 Sep 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2024)A Taxonomy of Robot Autonomy for Human-Robot InteractionProceedings of the 2024 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/3610977.3634993(381-393)Online publication date: 11-Mar-2024
  • (2024)The effect of uneven and obstructed site layouts in best-of-NSwarm Intelligence10.1007/s11721-024-00236-9Online publication date: 7-Mar-2024
  • (2023)Measuring Human-Robot Team Benefits Under Time Pressure in a Virtual Reality Testbed2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)10.1109/IROS55552.2023.10341794(5410-5417)Online publication date: 1-Oct-2023
  • (2023)Resilience for Goal-Based Agents: Formalism, Metrics, and Case StudiesIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2023.332675511(121999-122015)Online publication date: 2023
  • (2022)Measuring Resilience in Collective Robotic AlgorithmsProceedings of the 21st International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems10.5555/3535850.3536070(1666-1668)Online publication date: 9-May-2022
  • (2022)Transparency’s Influence on Human-collective InteractionsACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/350747011:2(1-48)Online publication date: 23-Mar-2022
  • (2021)Human-collective visualization transparencySwarm Intelligence10.1007/s11721-021-00194-615:3(237-286)Online publication date: 3-Jun-2021

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

HTML Format

View this article in HTML Format.

HTML Format

Get Access

Login options

Full Access

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media