Why Animals Swarm for Swarms

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Load more

Why Animals Swarm for Swarms Until recently, following the crowd was not seen as a desirable goal in life. These days, however, everyone is talking about swarm intelligence. But are swarms really smarter than individuals? And what rules, if any, do they follow? With the help of new computational techniques, Iain Couzin from the Max Planck Institute for Ornithology in Radolfzell imposes order on the seeming chaos of swarms. TEXT KLAUS WILHELM aboon troops are strictly hier- tested ruler again, and the other troop archical with an alpha male members must make do with his left- ruling the roost. However, overs. “Even though individuals are signs of democracy have re- self-interested, it appears that democrat- cently been observed – for ex- ic principles still apply,” says Couzin. ample,B when the animals are hunting for food. “Even the uninformed animals FROM CHILDHOOD CURIOSITY in the troop participate in decisions TO CUTTING-EDGE RESEARCHER about possible food locations and the route the troop will take to find them. As a researcher, Couzin’s heart beats This may be advantageous to the dom- faster when he tells stories like this. He inant male, as it means that he can ben- comes across like a young boy in the efit from the decisions of others when process of discovering the world, but locating good food sources,” explains the biologist has been carrying out cut- Couzin, whose department conducts re- ting-edge research for two decades and search at the University of Konstanz. regularly makes astonishing discover- However, upon reaching the food ies. His research passion: the swarm, source, the alpha male is the uncon- that most beguiling form of collective. Photo: Axel Griesch 62 MaxPlanckResearch 2 | 17 ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE_Collective Behavior Why Animals Swarm for Swarms In nature, migrating locusts form swarms comprising over a billion individuals when too many animals live in one area. Iain Couzin wants to discover what determines the behavior of such swarms. His analyses Photo: Axel Griesch have shown that the animals are driven by the fear of being eaten. 2 | 17 MaxPlanckResearch 63 ENVIRONMENT & CLIMATE_Collective Behavior A school of fish is a self-organizing system. Decisions are based » on the movements of the individual animals “The beauty of swarms fascinated me nally have some in the laboratory imals in the Sahara some time ago, he even as a child,” says the 42-year-old again!” Couzin’s delight at this is evi- almost died of starvation. “I hallucinat- Scot. “I always wanted to know why and dent. He has had to get by without the ed,” he recalls, “and I thought I would how animals gather in large groups.” insects for a long time – too long for die.” In the end, all of the insects were Today, swarm has become a byword his taste. blown away by a sand storm, and Cou- for wisdom. Just 50 years ago, serious zin left Africa with no data. scientists fancied that telepathic forces HUNTING FOR LOCUSTS Because of this experience, he fo- were at work when, for example, thou- IN THE SAHARA cused on researching the insects in the sands of fish move and turn together as laboratory. With his team, he built a if by magic. Even when a swarm spon- Couzin has many scientific passions, circuit on which the locusts could taneously changes direction, order is but he is particularly drawn to the be- move as they pleased. Every morning maintained and there are seldom colli- havior of insects – perhaps because lo- the scientists released up to 120 ani- sions. The animals coordinate their custs have helped him reach some very mals into the perfectly secured circuit. movements considerably better than exciting research findings. By evening, however, it was found that humans driving in traffic. However, he almost paid a very high some locusts had disappeared. “This Birds and insects have similar skills. price for this: when he spent weeks went on for days and I started to doubt Consider locusts, for instance. “We fi- looking for the legendary swarming an- my own sanity, or at least my ability to count.” That was until he was able to examine video recordings of the go- ings-on in the arena in detail and made a startling discovery: the animals eat one another. After all, locusts are cannibals. Experts had considered them to be vegetarians and cooperative, for example when they suddenly form gi- ant swarms and, as one of the great Biblical plagues, strip entire swaths of land bare. “But their behavior has nothing to do with cooperation. Rather, they are driven by the fear of being cannibal- ized by others within the swarm,” ex- plains Couzin. When many insects come together, they can run out of es- sential nutrients, and that’s when they begin to turn on one another. It was Couzin (right) and his PhD student Jake Graving observe the swarm behavior of locusts in the laboratory. To this end, they built a circular track from which the animals can’t escape. Photo: Axel Griesch 64 MaxPlanckResearch 2 | 17 A school of fish is a self-organizing system. Decisions are based on the movements of the individual animals The fish cellar at the University of Konstanz is lined with aquariums like in a pet shop. The researchers keep predominantly sunbleaks and golden shiners to study what guides the behavior of fish swarms. found that each individual attempts to position, too. The individual animals in struct the animals’ fields of vision. In eat the one in front of it, and to avoid a swarm synchronize their movements this way, the scientists aim to decode being eaten by those behind. The re- in this way, even over distances of sev- the rules that govern the swarm. sult is a mobile cannibalistic horde on eral kilometers. In addition to locusts, Couzin is also a “forced march”. fascinated by another swarm-forming This discovery was considered noth- ANALYSES IN THE WILD, IN THE group of organisms: fish. For instance, ing short of groundbreaking in expert LAB AND ON THE COMPUTER he studies the golden shiner fish – a na- circles. Couzin and his colleagues found tive of North America –as juveniles, further experimental evidence support- This example illustrates Couzin’s un- with a length of around seven centime- ing his theory by severing the nerves in conventional approach to his research ters. In daylight, they swim in schools, the insects’ abdomens so that they no – holistic, if you will. He analyzes the but they remain motionless when it is longer felt the bites from behind. The animals’ behavior in the wild, in the dark. The fish follow clear rules when locusts immediately lost their ability to laboratory and in virtual realities, thus schooling: they seek out the proximity form a swarm. obtaining more comprehensive in- of conspecifics but without colliding With the aid of a computer simula- sights. To do this, he needs biologists, with them; a fish on the edge of the tion, Couzin’s team later discovered computer scientists, physicists and school is often the first to react to a that the locusts follow the laws of par- mathematicians on his team. “We have stimulus and thus disproportionately ticle physics. The animals are akin to a to teach the computer experts and bi- influences the movement of the entire “flowing magnetic field.” Their bodies ologists to speak the same language.” group. Furthermore, individual fish align with each other much like small Only by working together can they re- tend to adopt the direction selected by magnets. Changes in the position and construct animal swarms on the com- a majority. If six fish swim to the left orientation of one “particle” can cause puter. These computer models trace and five to the right, the swarm fre- Photo: Axel Griesch Photo: Axel Griesch neighboring particles to change their each individual in a swarm and recon- quently opts for the left. > 2 | 17 MaxPlanckResearch 65 Sunbleaks glide through huge basins. Cameras record their every movement. With the help of his computer models, thousands of organisms to literally But such conditions are almost impos- Couzin identified three factors that meld into a single entity. “Even com- sible to fulfill in reality. Individuals in control the behavior of a fish school: plex swarm behavior can arise from close proximity within a group tend to attraction, repulsion and alignment of simple interactions between the indi- have access to similar sensory informa- the individuals. For example, if the re- viduals. The animals don’t even have tion, so the cues they experience will searchers steer virtual individuals in to explicitly signal to one another. By not be independent, but correlated. their simulation slightly in one direc- responding to the movements of their Furthermore, individuals may use mul- tion, the group will very likely follow. neighbors, individuals can make high- tiple cues, or sensory modalities, when “So, a school of fish is a self-organizing ly effective collective decisions,” ex- making decisions. Using computer sim- system. Decisions are based on the plains Couzin. ulations of decision-making, Couzin movements of the individual animals,” and his colleague Albert Kao were able explains Couzin. If individual animals SMALLER GROUPS MAY MAKE to demonstrate that the conventional change direction, or suddenly swim BETTER DECISIONS view of the wisdom of crowds does not more slowly, their neighbors usually re- hold up when this realism is added. In act. The sum of the position and direc- However, as one of Couzin’s most re- most cases, they found that small to tion changes ultimately determines cent studies suggests, the wisdom of a medium-sized groups with between where the school will swim.
Recommended publications
  • Relatedness, Parentage, and Philopatry Within a Natterer's Bat

    Relatedness, Parentage, and Philopatry Within a Natterer's Bat

    Population Ecology (2018) 60:361–370 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10144-018-0632-7 ORIGINAL ARTICLE Relatedness, parentage, and philopatry within a Natterer’s bat (Myotis nattereri) maternity colony David Daniel Scott1 · Emma S. M. Boston2 · Mathieu G. Lundy1 · Daniel J. Buckley2 · Yann Gager1 · Callum J. Chaplain1 · Emma C. Teeling2 · William Ian Montgomery1 · Paulo A. Prodöhl1 Received: 20 April 2017 / Accepted: 26 September 2018 / Published online: 10 October 2018 © The Author(s) 2018 Abstract Given their cryptic behaviour, it is often difficult to establish kinship within microchiropteran maternity colonies. This limits understanding of group formation within this highly social group. Following a concerted effort to comprehensively sample a Natterer’s bat (Myotis nattereri) maternity colony over two consecutive summers, we employed microsatellite DNA profiling to examine genetic relatedness among individuals. Resulting data were used to ascertain female kinship, parentage, mating strategies, and philopatry. Overall, despite evidence of female philopatry, relatedness was low both for adult females and juveniles of both sexes. The majority of individuals within the colony were found to be unrelated or distantly related. How- ever, parentage analysis indicates the existence of a number of maternal lineages (e.g., grandmother, mother, or daughter). There was no evidence suggesting that males born within the colony are mating with females of the same colony. Thus, in this species, males appear to be the dispersive sex. In the Natterer’s bat, colony formation is likely to be based on the benefits of group living, rather than kin selection. Keywords Chiroptera · Kinship · Natal philopatry · Parentage assignment Introduction of the environment (Schober 1984).
  • Swarming (Bulletin #404) (PDF)

    Swarming (Bulletin #404) (PDF)

    Swarming Apiculture Bulletin #404 Updated: 10/15 Swarming is a natural method of honeybee colonies to reproduce, resulting in the creation of a new honeybee colony in addition to the established colony. Contributing factors to swarming • Crowding - too many bees, food stores and no cell space for the queen to lay eggs in. • Poor air circulation • April-May is swarming season and healthy colonies develop strong swarm impulse. • Inclement weather - crowded bees confined by cold, wet weather will build queen cells and swarm out on the first sunny, warm day. All colonies in similar condition will swarm as soon as weather becomes favorable. • Large amount of drone brood in early spring is a precursor to strong swarm impulse. Catching the swarm A swarm generally emerges from the hive between 11:00AM and 1:00PM and settles close to the apiary for several hours. Allow the swarm to cluster for at least 30 minutes before placing the swarm in a single super with frames, bottom board and hive cover. Leave the hive for the remainder of the day to allow all the bees to enter, before moving to a permanent location. Examine the new colony after a week and then every two weeks from mid May to late June. Look for disease, brood abundance, brood pattern and overall condition of the colony. Add room where necessary, cut queen cells, or divide, to prevent other swarms to develop. Hived swarms have no stored food reserves and may go hungry when there is little forage. When feeding sugar syrup, add antibiotics as a precautionary measure.
  • What Is a Social Spider? “Sub”-Social Spiders Eusociality Social Definitions Natural History

    What Is a Social Spider? “Sub”-Social Spiders Eusociality Social Definitions Natural History

    What is a Social Spider? • Generally accepted as living in colonies while having generational overlap and exhibiting cooperative brood care and nest maintenance Scott Trageser • Can also have reproductive division of labor and exhibit swarming behavior (Achaearanea wau) • Social hierarchies arise • Species and population dependant • Arguable if certain species qualify as eusocial “Sub”-Social Spiders Eusociality • Sociality also classified by territoriality and • There is cooperative brood-care so it is permanence not each one caring for their own offspring • Can be social on a seasonal basis and • There is an overlapping of generations so have an obligate solitary phase that the colony will sustain for a while, • Individuals can have established allowing offspring to assist parents during territories within the nest or can move their life freely • That there is a reproductive division of • Can have discrete webs connected to labor, i.e. not every individual reproduces other webs in the colony (cooperative?) equally in the group Social Definitions Natural History • Solitary: Showing none of the three features mentioned in the previous slide (most insects) • 23 of over 39,000 spider species are • Sub-social: The adults care for their own young for “social” some period of time (cockroaches) • Many other species are classified as • Communal: Insects use the same composite nest without cooperation in brood care (digger bees) “sub”-social • Quasi-social: Use the same nest and also show cooperative brood care (Euglossine bees and social • Tropical origin. Latitudinal and elevational spiders) distribution constrictions due to prey • Semi-social: in addition to the features in type/abundance quasisocial, they also have a worker caste (Halictid bees) • Emigrate (swarm) after courtship and • Eusocial: In addition to the features of semisocial, copulation but prior to oviposition there is overlap in generations (Honey bees).
  • Inference of Causal Information Flow in Collective Animal Behavior Warren M

    Inference of Causal Information Flow in Collective Animal Behavior Warren M

    IEEE TMBMC SPECIAL ISSUE 1 Inference of Causal Information Flow in Collective Animal Behavior Warren M. Lord, Jie Sun, Nicholas T. Ouellette, and Erik M. Bollt Abstract—Understanding and even defining what constitutes study how the microscopic interactions scale up to give rise animal interactions remains a challenging problem. Correlational to the macroscopic properties [26]. tools may be inappropriate for detecting communication be- The third of these goals—how the microscopic individual- tween a set of many agents exhibiting nonlinear behavior. A different approach is to define coordinated motions in terms of to-individual interactions determine the macroscopic group an information theoretic channel of direct causal information behavior—has arguably received the most scientific attention flow. In this work, we present an application of the optimal to date, due to the availability of simple models of collective causation entropy (oCSE) principle to identify such channels behavior that are easy to simulate on computers, such as the between insects engaged in a type of collective motion called classic Reynolds [27], Vicsek [26], and Couzin [28] models. swarming. The oCSE algorithm infers channels of direct causal inference between insects from time series describing spatial From these kinds of studies, a significant amount is known movements. The time series are discovered by an experimental about the nature of the emergence of macroscopic patterns protocol of optical tracking. The collection of channels infered and ordering in active, collective systems [29]. But in argu- by oCSE describes a network of information flow within the ing that such simple models accurately describe real animal swarm. We find that information channels with a long spatial behavior, one must implicitly make the assumption that the range are more common than expected under the assumption that causal information flows should be spatially localized.
  • Swarm Intelligence

    Swarm Intelligence

    Swarm Intelligence Leen-Kiat Soh Computer Science & Engineering University of Nebraska Lincoln, NE 68588-0115 [email protected] http://www.cse.unl.edu/agents Introduction • Swarm intelligence was originally used in the context of cellular robotic systems to describe the self-organization of simple mechanical agents through nearest-neighbor interaction • It was later extended to include “any attempt to design algorithms or distributed problem-solving devices inspired by the collective behavior of social insect colonies and other animal societies” • This includes the behaviors of certain ants, honeybees, wasps, cockroaches, beetles, caterpillars, and termites Introduction 2 • Many aspects of the collective activities of social insects, such as ants, are self-organizing • Complex group behavior emerges from the interactions of individuals who exhibit simple behaviors by themselves: finding food and building a nest • Self-organization come about from interactions based entirely on local information • Local decisions, global coherence • Emergent behaviors, self-organization Videos • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dDsmbwOrHJs • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QbUPfMXXQIY • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M028vafB0l8 Why Not Centralized Approach? • Requires that each agent interacts with every other agent • Do not possess (environmental) obstacle avoidance capabilities • Lead to irregular fragmentation and/or collapse • Unbounded (externally predetermined) forces are used for collision avoidance • Do not possess distributed tracking (or migration)
  • The Use of Swarming Unmanned Vehicles to Support Target

    The Use of Swarming Unmanned Vehicles to Support Target

    Forthcoming in Proceedings of SPIE Defense & Security Conference, March 2008, Orlando, FL Distributed Pheromone-Based Swarming Control of Unmanned Air and Ground Vehicles for RSTA John A. Sauter, Robert S. Joshua S. Robinson, John Stephanie Riddle Mathews, Andrew Yinger* Moody† Naval Air Systems NewVectors Augusta Systems, Inc. Command (NAVAIR) 3520 Green Ct 3592 Collins Ferry Road 48150 Shaw Road Ann Arbor, MI 48105 Suite 200 Bldg. 2109 Suite S211-21 Morgantown, WV 26505 Patuxent River, MD 20670 Abstract The use of unmanned vehicles in Reconnaissance, Surveillance, and Target Acquisition (RSTA) applications has received considerable attention recently. Cooperating land and air vehicles can support multiple sensor modalities providing pervasive and ubiquitous broad area sensor coverage. However coordination of multiple air and land vehicles serving different mission objectives in a dynamic and complex environment is a challenging problem. Swarm intelligence algorithms, inspired by the mechanisms used in natural systems to coordinate the activities of many entities provide a promising alternative to traditional command and control approaches. This paper describes recent advances in a fully distributed digital pheromone algorithm that has demonstrated its effectiveness in managing the complexity of swarming unmanned systems. The results of a recent demonstration at NASA’s Wallops Island of multiple Aerosonde Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs) and Pioneer Unmanned Ground Vehicles (UGVs) cooperating in a coordinated RSTA application are discussed. The vehicles were autonomously controlled by the onboard digital pheromone responding to the needs of the automatic target recognition algorithms. UAVs and UGVs controlled by the same pheromone algorithm self-organized to perform total area surveillance, automatic target detection, sensor cueing, and automatic target recognition with no central processing or control and minimal operator input.
  • Adaptive Exploration of a Uavs Swarm for Distributed Targets Detection and Tracking

    Adaptive Exploration of a Uavs Swarm for Distributed Targets Detection and Tracking

    Adaptive Exploration of a UAVs Swarm for Distributed Targets Detection and Tracking Mario G. C. A. Cimino1, Massimiliano Lega2, Manilo Monaco1 and Gigliola Vaglini1 1Department of Information Engineering, University of Pisa, 56122 Pisa, Italy 2Department of Engineering University of Naples “Parthenope”, 80143 Naples, Italy Keywords: UAV, Swarm Intelligence, Stigmergy, Flocking, Differential Evolution, Target Detection, Target Tracking. Abstract: This paper focuses on the problem of coordinating multiple UAVs for distributed targets detection and tracking, in different technological and environmental settings. The proposed approach is founded on the concept of swarm behavior in multi-agent systems, i.e., a self-formed and self-coordinated team of UAVs which adapts itself to mission-specific environmental layouts. The swarm formation and coordination are inspired by biological mechanisms of flocking and stigmergy, respectively. These mechanisms, suitably combined, make it possible to strike the right balance between global search (exploration) and local search (exploitation) in the environment. The swarm adaptation is based on an evolutionary algorithm with the objective of maximizing the number of tracked targets during a mission or minimizing the time for target discovery. A simulation testbed has been developed and publicly released, on the basis of commercially available UAVs technology and real-world scenarios. Experimental results show that the proposed approach extends and sensibly outperforms a similar approach in the literature. 1 INTRODUCTION exploration of UAVs swarms are not sufficiently mature: limited flexibility, complex management and In this paper we consider the problem of discovering application-dependent design are the main issues to and tracking static or dynamic targets in unstructured solve (Senanayake et al.
  • An Introduction to Swarm Intelligence Issues

    An Introduction to Swarm Intelligence Issues

    An Introduction to Swarm Intelligence Issues Gianni Di Caro [email protected] IDSIA, USI/SUPSI, Lugano (CH) 1 Topics that will be discussed Basic ideas behind the notion of Swarm Intelligence The role of Nature as source of examples and ideas to design new algorithms and multi-agent systems From observations to models and to algorithms Self-organized collective behaviors The role of space and communication to obtain self-organization Social communication and stigmergic communication Main algorithmic frameworks based on the notion of Swarm Intelligence: Collective Intelligence, Particle Swarm Optimization, Ant Colony Optimization Computational complexity, NP-hardness and the need of (meta)heuristics Some popular metaheuristics for combinatorial optimization tasks 2 Swarm Intelligence: what’s this? Swarm Intelligence indicates a recent computational and behavioral metaphor for solving distributed problems that originally took its inspiration from the biological examples provided by social insects (ants, termites, bees, wasps) and by swarming, flocking, herding behaviors in vertebrates. Any attempt to design algorithms or distributed problem-solving devices inspired by the collective behavior of social insects and other animal societies. [Bonabeau, Dorigo and Theraulaz, 1999] . however, we don’t really need to “stick” on examples from Nature, whose constraints and targets might differ profoundly from those of our environments of interest . 3 Where does it come from? Nest building in termite or honeybee societies Foraging in ant colonies Fish schooling Bird flocking . 4 Nature’s examples of SI Fish schooling ( c CORO, CalTech) 5 Nature’s examples of SI (2) Birds flocking in V-formation ( c CORO, Caltech) 6 Nature’s examples of SI (3) Termites’ nest ( c Masson) 7 Nature’s examples of SI (4) Bees’ comb ( c S.
  • On Adaptive Self-Organization in Artificial Robot Organisms

    On Adaptive Self-Organization in Artificial Robot Organisms

    On adaptive self-organization in artificial robot organisms Serge Kernbach∗, Heiko Hamann†, Jurgen¨ Stradner†, Ronald Thenius†, Thomas Schmickl†, Karl Crailsheim†, A.C. van Rossum‡, Michele Sebag§, Nicolas Bredeche§, Yao Yao¶, Guy Baele¶, Yves Van de Peer¶, Jon Timmisk, Maizura Mohktark, Andy Tyrrellk, A.E. Eiben∗∗, S.P. McKibbin††, Wenguo Liu‡‡, Alan F.T. Winfield‡‡ ∗Institute of Parallel and Distributed Systems, University of Stuttgart, Germany, [email protected] †Artificial Life Lab, Karl-Franzens-University Graz, Universitatsplatz 2, A-8010 Graz, Austria, {heiko.hamann,juergen.stradner,ronald.thenius,thomas.schmickl,karl.crailsheim}@uni-graz.at ‡Almende B.V., 3016 DJ Rotterdam, Netherlands, [email protected] §TAO, LRI, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS, INRIA Saclay, France, {Michele.Sebag, Nicolas.Bredeche}@lri.fr ¶VIB Department Plant Systems Biology, Ghent University, Belgium, {Yao.Yao, Guy.Baele, Yves.VandePeer}@psb.vib-ugent.be kUniversity of York, York, United Kingdom, {mm520, jt517, amt}@ohm.york.ac.uk ∗∗Free University Amsterdam, [email protected] ††Materials and Engineering Research Institute (MERI), Sheffield Hallam University, [email protected] ‡‡Bristol Robotics Laboratory (BRL), UWE Bristol, {wenguo.liu, alan.winfield}@uwe.ac.uk Abstract—In Nature, self-organization demonstrates very reliable and scalable collective behavior in a distributed fash- ion. In collective robotic systems, self-organization makes it possible to address both the problem of adaptation to quickly changing environment and compliance with user-defined target objectives. This paper describes on-going work on artificial self-organization within artificial robot organisms, performed in the framework of the Symbrion and Replicator European projects. (a) (b) Keywords-adaptive system, self-adaptation, adaptive self- organization, collective robotics, artificial organisms I.
  • Asynchronous Evolution: Emergence of Signal-Based Swarming

    Asynchronous Evolution: Emergence of Signal-Based Swarming

    Asynchronous Evolution: Emergence of Signal-Based Swarming Olaf Witkowski and Takashi Ikegami University of Tokyo, Japan [email protected] Abstract towards a common direction. The movement itself may differ from species to species. Since Reynolds boids, swarming behavior has often been re- For example, fish and insects swarm in three dimensions, produced in artificial models, but the conditions leading to whereas herds of sheep move only in two dimensions. More- its emergence are still subject to research, with candidates over, the collective motion can have quite diverse dynamics. ranging from obstacle avoidance to virtual leaders. In this While birds migrate in relatively ordered formations with paper, we present a multi-agent model in which individuals develop swarming using only their ability to listen to each constant velocity, fish schools change directions by align- others signals. Our model uses an original asynchronous ge- ing rapidly and keeping their distances, and insects swarms netic algorithm to evolve a population of agents controlled by move in a messy and random-looking way (Budrene et al. artificial neural networks, looking for an invisible resource 1991, Czirok´ et al. 1997, Shimoyama et al. 1996). in a 3D environment. The results demonstrate that agents Numerous evolutionary hypotheses have been proposed use the information exchanged between them via signaling to form temporary leader-follower relations allowing them to to explain swarming behavior across species. These include flock together. more efficient mating, good environment for learning, com- bined search for food resources, and reducing risks of pre- dation (Zaera et al., 1996). Partridge and Pitcher (1979) also Introduction mention energy saving in fish schools by reducing drag.
  • Expert Assessment of Stigmergy: a Report for the Department of National Defence

    Expert Assessment of Stigmergy: a Report for the Department of National Defence

    Expert Assessment of Stigmergy: A Report for the Department of National Defence Contract No. W7714-040899/003/SV File No. 011 sv.W7714-040899 Client Reference No.: W7714-4-0899 Requisition No. W7714-040899 Contact Info. Tony White Associate Professor School of Computer Science Room 5302 Herzberg Building Carleton University 1125 Colonel By Drive Ottawa, Ontario K1S 5B6 (Office) 613-520-2600 x2208 (Cell) 613-612-2708 [email protected] http://www.scs.carleton.ca/~arpwhite Expert Assessment of Stigmergy Abstract This report describes the current state of research in the area known as Swarm Intelligence. Swarm Intelligence relies upon stigmergic principles in order to solve complex problems using only simple agents. Swarm Intelligence has been receiving increasing attention over the last 10 years as a result of the acknowledgement of the success of social insect systems in solving complex problems without the need for central control or global information. In swarm- based problem solving, a solution emerges as a result of the collective action of the members of the swarm, often using principles of communication known as stigmergy. The individual behaviours of swarm members do not indicate the nature of the emergent collective behaviour and the solution process is generally very robust to the loss of individual swarm members. This report describes the general principles for swarm-based problem solving, the way in which stigmergy is employed, and presents a number of high level algorithms that have proven utility in solving hard optimization and control problems. Useful tools for the modelling and investigation of swarm-based systems are then briefly described.
  • Background on Swarms the Problem the Algorithm Tested On: Boids

    Background on Swarms the Problem the Algorithm Tested On: Boids

    Anomaly Detection in Swarm Robotics: What if a member is hacked? Dan Cronce, Dr. Andrew Williams, Dr. Debbie Perouli Background on Swarms The Problem Finding Absolute Positions of Others ● Swarm - a collection of homogeneous individuals who The messages broadcasted from each swarm member contain In swarm intelligence, each member locally contributes to the locally interact global behavior. If a member were to be maliciously positions from its odometry. However, we cannot trust the controlled, its behavior could be used to control a portion of member we’re monitoring, so we must have a another way of ● Swarm Intelligence - the collective behavior exhibited by the global behavior. This research attempts to determine how finding the position of the suspect. Our method is to find the a swarm one member can determine anomalous behavior in another. distance from three points using the signal strength of its WiFi However, a problem arises: and then using trilateration to determine its current position. Swarm intelligence algorithms enjoy many benefits such as If all we’re detecting is anomalous behavior, how do we tell the scalability and fault tolerance. However, in order to achieve difference between a fault and being hacked? these benefits, the algorithm should follow four rules: Experimental Setting From an outside perspective, we can’t tell if there’s a problem Currently, we have a large, empty space for the robots to roam. with the sensors, the motor, or whether the device is being ● Local interactions only - there cannot be a global store of We plan to set up devices to act as wifi trilateration servers, information or a central server to command the swarm manipulated.