direction election in flocking swarms ohad ben-shahar, shlomi dolev andrey dolgin, michael segal...

Download Direction Election in Flocking Swarms Ohad Ben-Shahar, Shlomi Dolev Andrey Dolgin, Michael Segal Ben-Gurion University of the Negev

If you can't read please download the document

Upload: madison-potter

Post on 18-Dec-2015

219 views

Category:

Documents


4 download

TRANSCRIPT

  • Slide 1
  • Direction Election in Flocking Swarms Ohad Ben-Shahar, Shlomi Dolev Andrey Dolgin, Michael Segal Ben-Gurion University of the Negev
  • Slide 2
  • Agenda Introduction Spring network Rotating leadership election Future research
  • Slide 3
  • Introduction Gathering and Leading Direction Election Entities obtain only position of neighbors Multiple entities may want to lead What problem we are dealing with?
  • Slide 4
  • Agent model Agent dynamics Control laws Linear (Vicsek) Nonlinear (Reynolds) Why is it exponentially decreasing with time??? ANALYSIS OF COORDINATION IN MULTI-AGENT SYSTEMS THROUGH PARTIAL DIFFERENCE EQUATIONS. PART II: NONLINEAR CONTROL Giancarlo Ferrari-Trecate, Annalisa Bua,Mehdi Gati, IFAC 2005.
  • Slide 5
  • Reynolds Rules http://www.red3d.com/cwr/boids/ Reynolds suggests three intuitive rules : Separation Alignment Cohesion steer towards the average heading of local flockmates steer to avoid crowding local flockmates steer to move toward the average position of local flockmates
  • Slide 6
  • Reynolds Rules Unfortunately do not cope with Symmetry Two move in opposite directions or towards each other preventing simultaneous flocking
  • Slide 7
  • Related Work [TJP03] Potential function: Collision avoidance Maintaining links Single leader only No errors Tanner, H. G., Jadbabaie, A., and Pappas, G. J., Stable flocking of mobile agents, Part II: dynamic topology", Proc. IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Maui, Hawaii, pp. 2016-2021, 2003.
  • Slide 8
  • Related Work [TJP03] IF the graph is always connected then All pair-wise velocity differences converge asymptotically to zero, Collisions between the agents are avoided. Tanner, H. G., Jadbabaie, A., and Pappas, G. J., Stable flocking of mobile agents, Part II: dynamic topology", Proc. IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, Maui, Hawaii, pp. 2016-2021, 2003.
  • Slide 9
  • Related Work [JW09] Multiple Leaders All entities exponentially converge to the weighted average position and velocity of leaders, WHEN connectivity is preserved. Jiang-Ping, H., Hai-Wen, Y., Collective coordination of multi-agent systems guided by multiple leaders", IEEE Transactions On Robotics, Vol. 18, No. 9, 2009.
  • Slide 10
  • Multiple Leaders
  • Slide 11
  • Our Spring Network Definition Spring is a virtual structure connecting any two neighboring entities. The force that the spring applies on its ends is F = (r ij - (R - r)/2)/2. The spring attains its equilibrium state in the middle between R and r. Moreover a spring never exceeds R nor reduced to less than r.
  • Slide 12
  • Spring Network Theorem: Connectivity Preserving and Collision Avoidance Given the spring graph initial connectivity And the fact that the algorithm does not violate the spring definition.
  • Slide 13
  • Leader motion e includes a random variable term added for symmetry breaking
  • Slide 14
  • Non Leader Motion Try to move to relax the spring Avoiding moves that may violate R or r Take in account the movement of the neighbors and the errors in the measurements.
  • Slide 15
  • Non-leader motion
  • Slide 16
  • Rotating Leader Election Each candidate tries to define the direction for T time.
  • Slide 17
  • Rotating Leader Election A part of T is dedicated for spring network convergence --- to provide each leader a possibility to move, Since the equilibrium state of each spring is in the middle between r and R, this is the optimal position, to move in any desired direction.
  • Slide 18
  • Leader Election for Labeled Entities ORDER = [1..n]. Wait until ORDER == (T global mod nT )+ 1 then lead for time slot T, preserving spring definition. Update neighbor list with newly created springs. Start over again
  • Slide 19
  • Leader Election for Labeled Entities convergenceleading entity i entity i+1 waiting convergenceleadingwaiting
  • Slide 20
  • Leader Election for Unlabeled Entities Uniformly choose ORDER on the range [1,P]. Wait until ORDER == (T global mod P )+ 1 then lead for time slot T, preserving spring definition. Update neighbor list with newly created springs Start over again
  • Slide 21
  • Leader Election for Unlabeled Entities convergenceleading entity i entity j waiting convergence leadingwaitingconvergence leading
  • Slide 22
  • Leader Election The probability for all entities to have a chance to lead alone for time slot T
  • Slide 23
  • Leader election theorem Theorem: Direction election algorithms will make the swarm follow a single leader at least k times in a leading period with predetermined probability.
  • Slide 24
  • Leader election for unsynchronized clocks An additional part in the time slot T should be allocated for synchronization. Allowing entities to lead only after this additional part, no two entities with different ORDER values can compete for leadership. All other properties are preserved.
  • Slide 25
  • Leader election for unsynchronized clocks ORDER=k convergence synchronization leading entity i waiting ORDER=k+1 convergence synchronization leading entity j waiting start s with j T length period If starts more than T/2 following the previous and more than T/2 before the next, then no collision, same probability as having an index of T for yourself in the slotted T (rather than 2T) case
  • Slide 26
  • Leader election for unsynchronized clocks Uniformly choose ORDER in the range [1,P]. Wait until ORDER == (T global mod P )+ 1 then lead for time slot T, preserving spring definition. Update neighbor list with newly created springs Start over again
  • Slide 27
  • Leader election asynchronized clocks The probability for all entities to have a chance to lead alone is the same, since entities with different ORDER lead in different time slots.
  • Slide 28
  • Leader election Priority Scheduling N P different leading scenarios are possible. N P =1 for highest priority. ORDER is multiplied by N P. Leader Election Algorithm.
  • Slide 29
  • Calculating T F L The relative error is bounded by 2X/L goes down as L increases. X is bounded by nR. X 2X
  • Slide 30
  • Conclusion Bounded errors are considered. Collision avoidance and connectivity is preserved all the time. Leadership direction is efficiently elected with predetermined probability.
  • Slide 31
  • THANK YOU