4.4 Article

Evolution of swarm robotics systems with novelty search

期刊

SWARM INTELLIGENCE
卷 7, 期 2-3, 页码 115-144

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11721-013-0081-z

关键词

Evolutionary robotics; Neuroevolution; Swarm robotics; Novelty search; NEAT; Behavioural diversity; Deception

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (FCT) [PTDC/EEACRO/104658/2008, PEst-OE/EEI/LA0008/2011, SFRH/BD/89095/2012]
  2. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BD/89095/2012, PTDC/EEA-CRO/104658/2008] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Novelty search is a recent artificial evolution technique that challenges traditional evolutionary approaches. In novelty search, solutions are rewarded based on their novelty, rather than their quality with respect to a predefined objective. The lack of a predefined objective precludes premature convergence caused by a deceptive fitness function. In this paper, we apply novelty search combined with NEAT to the evolution of neural controllers for homogeneous swarms of robots. Our empirical study is conducted in simulation, and we use a common swarm robotics task-aggregation, and a more challenging task-sharing of an energy recharging station. Our results show that novelty search is unaffected by deception, is notably effective in bootstrapping evolution, can find solutions with lower complexity than fitness-based evolution, and can find a broad diversity of solutions for the same task. Even in non-deceptive setups, novelty search achieves solution qualities similar to those obtained in traditional fitness-based evolution. Our study also encompasses variants of novelty search that work in concert with fitness-based evolution to combine the exploratory character of novelty search with the exploitatory character of objective-based evolution. We show that these variants can further improve the performance of novelty search. Overall, our study shows that novelty search is a promising alternative for the evolution of controllers for robotic swarms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据