Swarm optimization approach for light source detection by multi-robot system

VNU Journal of Science: Comp. Science & Com. Eng., Vol. 32, No. 3 (2016) 1-10  
Swarm Optimization Approach  
for Light Source Detection by Multi-robot System1  
Hoang Anh Quy, Pham Minh Trien  
VNU University of Engineering and Technology, 144 Xuan Thuy, Cau Giay, Hanoi, Vietnam  
Abstract  
Exploration and searching in unknown or hazardous environments using multi-robot systems (MRS) is  
among the principal topics in robotics. There have been numerous works on searching and detection of odor, fire  
or pollution sources. In this paper, a modified Particle Swarm Optimization Algorithm (PSO) was presented for  
MRS on detecting light sources, namely APSO. In the proposed algorithm, an integration of conventional PSO  
and Artificial Potential Field (APF) is employed to use swarm intelligence for space exploration and light source  
detection. The formulas for APSO velocities are based on those of PSO and APF. Furthermore, each particle is  
surrounded by an APF that forms repulsive force to prevent collision while the swarm is in operation. The  
simulation results of APSO in Matlab by various scenarios confirmed the reliability and efficiency of the  
proposed algorithm.  
Received 04 December 2015, Revised 09 January 2016, Accepted 26 September 2016  
Keywords: PSO, MRS, APF, APSO, light source detection.  
1. Introduction*  
because of its efficiency, intuitiveness and  
simplicity. Motivated by social searching  
Owing to their robustness to local optima,  
behavior of natural swarm, PSO is especially  
widespread coverage and high degree of  
effective in optimization problems and widely  
accuracy, multi-robot systems (MRS) are  
applied in various fields. Searching tasks of  
highly efficient in the tasks of space exploration  
MRS are in fact optimization problems, in  
and searching in unknown environments. There  
which the robots attempt to locate the regions  
have been numerous works in which MRS was  
or spots of extreme signal intensity.  
used to detect fire, pollutant sources and odor  
Although the idea of applying PSO to  
sources [1, 2, 3].  
multi-robot search is not novel, many problems  
Among a variety of potential algorithms to  
still need to be addressed adequately in order to  
implement on MRS, Particle Swarm  
put that idea into practice. Some of them are  
Optimization (PSO) has become a natural  
proneness to collision and premature  
choice for MRS in searching tasks. PSO was  
convergence. Many of the related works are  
first introduced by Russel Ebenhart and James  
concerned with improving performance of the  
Kennedy in 1995 [4] and has gained popularity  
MRS. In [5], the authors concentrated on  
among bio-inspired heuristic algorithms  
adjusting learning parameters for better results.  
In [6] the PSO algorithm was applied to model  
multi-robot search and the effects of system  
parameters were also evaluated. In [7], Doctor  
_______  
1 This work is dedicated to the 20th Anniversary of the IT  
Faculty of VNU-UET  
* Corresponding author. E-mail.: quyha@vnu.edu.vn  
1
H.A. Quy, P.M. Trien / VNU Journal of Science: Comp. Science & Com. Eng., Vol. 32, No. 3 (2016) 1-10  
2
et al. proposed a two PSO loops model to  
deployment of robotic systems, flame detection  
or optical wireless charging.  
control their robot system. The inner loop was  
applied for collective robotic search and the  
outer was used to optimize quality parameters  
of the inner. In [8], Cai et. al. proposed a  
potential field-based PSO algorithm for  
cooperative multi-robots in target searching  
tasks. The problem of premature convergence,  
which may adversely affect performance of  
PSO, was addressed in [9], where Nakisa et. al.  
applied a method based on PSO and Local  
The methodology and simulation are  
discussed in detail in part 2, the results and  
discussions follow in part 3. Finally, part 4  
concludes this paper with main conclusions and  
directions for further research.  
2. Methodology and simulation  
2.1. Methodology  
Search.  
In spite of various works on  
2.1.1. Artificial Potential Field  
application of PSO for MRS in the tasks of  
exploration or searching in unknown  
environments, there has not been a standard  
approach with optimal result. All of the PSO-  
based algorithms still need further experiments  
and improvements.  
The APF model is inspired by Artificial  
Physics with quadratic function, where the  
choice of coefficients is commensurate to the  
wireless sensor network of MRS. Myriads of  
architectures for APF have been developed in  
accordance with users’ definitions and specific  
tasks, e.g. deploying mobile sensor networks in  
unknown environment [12], controlling and  
coordinating a group of robots for cooperative  
manipulation tasks [13] or maintaining  
connectivity of mobile networks [14]. In any  
architecture, magnitude of the potential force  
existing around each robot is continuously  
updated based on information collected from its  
immediate surrounding environment and other  
robots via connection network. Therefore, APF  
is used to regulate the relation between robots  
in term of position. Potential force is  
categorized into two main groups: passive force  
and active force. Passive force is generated  
when robot emit signal and determine distance  
to neighboring robots or obstacles by the  
magnitude of reflected signal to avoid obstacle  
or remain relative position with other robots.  
The signal used in the application could be  
infrared, ultrasound, laser or camera [15]. On  
the contrary, active force is generated from  
external signals. These signals are usually  
emitted by other robots and transmitted via  
communication system [11]. In this research,  
APF is only utilized for the purpose of collision  
avoidance and only generates repulsive forces  
on other particles within repulsive region, as  
defined in this formula:  
In this paper, we present another approach  
and a specific application: detecting light  
sources or in other words, searching for the  
brightest region in a search space. This method  
is then compared with one of those mentioned  
above. In our simulations, an MRS is  
successfully used to detect light sources (by  
gathering all the swarm robots around the area  
of highest luminance in the search space). In all  
scenarios, each robot (or particle as described in  
PSO) has to move towards the mutual target  
and meanwhile avoid obstacles. For the robot  
swarm to exhibit this behavior, we modified  
PSO algorithm by associating each particle with  
an artificial potential field (APF) that can exert  
repulsive forces to any other particle if their  
distance is less than a predetermined value  
called repulsive radius. This method of  
avoiding collisions is inspired by APF  
algorithm, which was proposed by Oussama  
Khatib in 1986 for single robot path planning  
[10]. APF is widely used nowadays in works on  
MRS that demonstrate the interaction between  
robots and obstacles in their work space [11].  
The proposed PSO algorithm is named APSO,  
its details will be presented in the next sections.  
The simulation in Matlab shows reliable and  
promising results, which could be applied in  
various further applications such as dynamic  
H.A. Quy, P.M. Trien / VNU Journal of Science: Comp. Science & Com. Eng., Vol. 32, No. 3 (2016) 1-10  
3
r
and particles’ positions are updated with the  
following formulae:  
ij  
)
r
ij  
FAPFij  
=
F
max kr 2  
ij  
(1)  
(
vinertial = w´ vt- 1 (3)  
where Fmax and k are predetermined constants to  
regulate the magnitude of potential force, FAPFij  
is the APF force exerted on robot i by robot j. rij  
is the end-to-end distance vector from robot j to  
robot i. rij is the module of rij.  
vcognitive = a1 ´ u1 ´ j (pt- 1 - xt- 1)  
vsocial = a2 ´ u2 ´ j (gt- 1 - xt- 1)  
vt = vinertial + vcognitive + vsocial  
(4)  
(5)  
(6)  
Total force exerted on i-th robot of the  
xt = xt- 1 + vt  
where:  
(7)  
system is:  
N
FAPFi  
=
FAPFij (2)  
å
j= 1  
vt: velocity of the swarm at t (time)  
w: inertial factor  
where N is the number of robots, FAPFij is zero  
if i = j. The impact of FAPFi on overall velocity  
is controlled by Fmax and k. As Fmax increases,  
the particle is less likely to approach obstacles.  
In subsection 2.1.2, this will be discussed  
further.  
a
1 : cognitive coefficient  
2 : social coefficient  
1 : random number in [0, 1]  
2 : random number in [0, 1]  
a
u
u
2.1.2 APSO for MRS  
pt: personal best positions at t  
gt: global best positions at t  
xt: position of the swarm at t  
The main contribution of this paper is to  
propose and evaluate the efficiency of APSO, a  
modified PSO algorithm. In this subsection, we  
briefly present principles of PSO and then  
explain APSO in detail.  
φ(x): a matrix function that returns a row  
vector with each element being Euclidean norm  
of corresponding column in the matrix  
argument.  
In PSO, the swarm consists of  
homogeneous particles that can explore the  
search space collectively. During the  
exploration, the movement of a particle is  
controlled by a velocity comprised of three  
components: inertial, cognitive and social  
velocity. Cognitive velocity leads the particle  
towards its personal best position and social  
velocity leads the particle towards the global  
best. Inertial velocity guides each particle  
towards their previous directions and thus keeps  
particles’ movement smooth [16]. Besides, high  
inertial velocity and cognitive velocity at initial  
steps make the swarm discover search space  
better. The social learning factor should be  
increased and cognitive factor should be  
decreased throughout the exploration in order to  
enlarge the swarm’s coverage at initial steps  
and make it converge faster at final steps. The  
searching process using PSO is implemented in  
four stages: initializing, updating best positions,  
updating velocity and position, and finally,  
checking for stopping criteria. PSO velocities  
In (4), φ(pt-1 xt-1) returns a vector. Each  
element of this vector is distance from a  
corresponding particle to its own best position.  
It is noteworthy that both position and velocity  
are vectors, so in the step of updating position,  
they are added directly to get new position,  
without any dimensional conflict.  
To apply PSO to an MRS, each robot is  
modelled as a particle of the swarm and their  
movements in the search space resemble those  
of ideal particles described above. Actual  
implementation of PSO for MRS involves  
additional techniques to solve problems which  
are not covered in its conventional version,  
such as collision avoidance. APSO is developed  
to solve that problem. The steps in APSO are  
basically the same as those of PSO, but the  
velocities and positions are updated with APF-  
based formulae. Artificial potential fields are  
also created around every particle in the search  
space. The repulsive force between a particle  
and another particle or an obstacle is given by:  
H.A. Quy, P.M. Trien / VNU Journal of Science: Comp. Science & Com. Eng., Vol. 32, No. 3 (2016) 1-10  
4
F = (Fmax - k´ r2 )´ (H(0)- H(r ))  
between two quantities, in which the first  
quantity progresses from a small beginning,  
then accelerates and approach its climax as the  
second quantity increase. There are three  
regions on the curve: beginning, acceleration  
and saturation region.  
(8)  
1
where r is the distance between the two objects,  
Fmax is the maximum value of the repulsive  
force. H(x) is Heaviside step function. r1 is the  
radius of separation, i.e., repulsive forces are  
only applicable to particles or points whose  
distance to each other is smaller than r1. A robot  
has a limited sensing range, this range must be  
larger than r1. k is a parameter dependent upon  
r1, it is calculated so that F is equal to zero  
when r = r1. Total repulsive force exerted on a  
robot is the sum of all the repulsive forces  
exerted by other objects, according to (8).  
vseparation is defined as the forth component  
velocity, responsible for assuring a collision-  
Algorithm: APSO  
1.  
Initializing  
- Generate the population  
- Evaluate objective function  
2.  
Update personal best position  
- For each particle, compare fitness of past positions and choose  
the optimum position as its new personal best position  
3.  
Update global best position  
- Compare personal best positions of particles and choose the  
optimum position as global best position  
4.  
Update and regulate velocity  
- Update velocity using (13)  
- Limit velocity if needed  
free  
exploration  
of  
the  
MRS.  
In  
implementation, vseparation corresponds to total  
repulsive forces on robots in the swarm.  
The set of formulae used to update velocity  
and position in APSO is:  
5.  
Update position  
- Calculate new position using (14)  
- Evaluate objective function for each particle  
6.  
- Stop if maximum step is reached or the swarm has converged  
- Otherwise, come back to step 2.  
Check stopping criteria  
w = sig(d´ k + l)  
(9)  
vinertial = w.´ vt- 1 (10)  
Figure 1. Implementation of APSO.  
(11)  
vcognitive = C´ sig(j (pt- 1 - xt- 1)´ u + v)  
Fmax  
(12)  
vsocial = S´ sig(j (gt- 1 - xt- 1)´ u+ v)  
vt = vinertial + vcognitive + vsocial + vseparation (13)  
xt = xt- 1 + vt  
(14)  
where:  
Fmax/2  
d: represents immediate population density  
at the position of a robot.  
. ×: element-wise matrix multiplication  
sig(x): element-wise sigmoid function on  
Fmin  
matrix:  
0
r1  
r2  
Distance  
1
1+ e- x(i, j)  
(15)  
sig(x)(i, j) =  
Figure 2. Attractive force.  
k, l, u, v: adjusting parameters used to adjust  
values of quantities of interest.  
This property was used to control velocities  
in APSO. vcognitive and vsocial are dependent upon  
the distances of particle to their personal best  
position and global best position. These  
velocities are regulated so that their magnitude  
and the corresponding distance could be  
described by a monotonically increasing  
relationship. With k being negative, (9) gives a  
C: maximum value of vcognitive  
S: maximum value of vsocial  
In Figure 1, the implementation of APSO is  
presented.  
In APSO, sigmoid function is widely used  
because of an appropriate property of the  
sigmoid curve. It exhibits a relationship  
H.A. Quy, P.M. Trien / VNU Journal of Science: Comp. Science & Com. Eng., Vol. 32, No. 3 (2016) 1-10  
5
lower inertia for a higher population density.  
During the exploration, each robot sees the  
search space as a potential field, with repulsive  
force being proportional to vseparation; attractive  
force proportional to a combination of vcognitive  
and vsocial. The magnitude of attractive force  
could be described by a sigmoid curve (Figure  
2.). The potential field is time-varying. As the  
position of particles change, global and  
personal best positions are always improved.  
However, in APSO, such criterion is not  
applicable because each particle has to maintain  
a distance to other particles. In our simulation,  
the two following criteria are used to determine  
whether the swarm is converged:  
1. Improvement in best fitness: The swarm  
is said to be making progress if in 10  
consecutive iterations, best fitness is improved  
by at least 0.1%.  
2. Physical convergence: If in 10  
consecutive iterations, the position of the  
swarm’s center of mass does not change  
considerably (less than the radius of a particle)  
and a certain number of particles are at a small  
distance from the center, we said that the swarm  
has physically converged. The number of  
particles and the distance are proportional to  
swarm population.  
Figure  
3
shows the potential energy  
configuration for a robot outside of sensing  
range of any others. The robot is also not close  
to any obstacles and its personal best and global  
best positions are respectively (15, 15) and (20,  
-20). The search space is confined in x = [-  
50,50] and y = [-50,50].  
In short, if there is no improvement in best  
fitness and the change in the swarm’s position  
is inconsiderable, the swarm is considered to be  
converged and the searching process is  
terminated. It is worth noting that this kind of  
convergence criterion is not absolute  
convergence since not all particles gather  
around the swarm’s center. The operation is  
deemed successful if after convergence, the  
point of highest luminance is covered by the  
swarm and is within a predefined radius from  
global best position.  
Figure 3. Potential energy configuration.  
The main difference between PSO and  
APSO is how velocity is updated. In APSO,  
vseparation, a new velocity is introduced. Its  
inertial value depends on immediate population  
density, vcognitive and vsocial are functions of  
distance, described by the sigmoid function.  
This reduces the possibility of collision,  
meanwhile yields a high performance.  
2.2. Simulation  
2.2.1. Simulation setup and MRS  
configuration  
In this research, we implement APSO on a  
homogeneous MRS in Matlab environment.  
The radius of each robot (r) is set as unit of  
length. The system has direct communication,  
the communication range is unlimited (beyond  
the limit of search space). r1 is 5×r, i.e. a robot  
can detect obstacles at the distance of 5×r from  
its position. Population size varies between 5,  
10 and 15. Maximum velocity is 1.5×r/step.  
Each robot is able to acquire the illuminance at  
its position via a light sensor on top.  
2.1.3. Criteria for convergence  
We claim that the exploration is success  
when the swarm converges atthe point of  
maximum illuminance. The criterion for  
convergence of the swarm in conventional PSO  
is simple and intuitive, as the swarm is said to  
be converged when all the particles is within a  
given radius, e.g. 10-3 of smallest dimension of  
the search space, regardless of population size.  
H.A. Quy, P.M. Trien / VNU Journal of Science: Comp. Science & Com. Eng., Vol. 32, No. 3 (2016) 1-10  
6
If we set r = 1, the search space size is  
In the next two scenarios, we test with real  
light sources. Figure 6. and Figure 7. are  
contour maps of light intensity in regions  
100×100. In the Cartesian coordinate system,  
the ranges of x and y coordinates are both [-50,  
50]. We evaluate the effectiveness of the  
modified PSO algorithm in three scenarios with  
the presence of an isotropic source and two real  
light sources: 87517M56FG [17] and  
AVL1XMAMDG [18]. In the simulations, all  
obstacles in the search space are static  
cylindrical obstacles. The radii of cylindrical  
obstacles used in all scenarios are 4.  
illuminated  
by  
AVL1XMAMDG  
and  
87517M56FG, respectively.  
2000  
4000  
6000  
8000  
10000  
12000  
50  
40  
30  
20  
10  
0
-10  
-20  
-30  
-40  
-50  
-50  
0
50  
Figure 6. Scenario 2 - AVL1XMAMDG.  
In each scenario, three population sizes: 5  
robots, 10 robots and 15 robots are simulated. The  
results acquired after 1000 runs (for each scenario  
and population size) is presented in Figure 9. The  
figures are statistical graphs given for analysis of  
reliability and effectiveness of APSO.  
Figure 4. Scenario 1 - 3D View.  
2.2.2. Detection of light sources in different  
scenarios  
In the first scenario, a single light source is  
placed above the search space at (20, -20)  
(Figure 5). There are four static obstacles at  
(-30, -30), (-20, 30), (0, 0) and (30, 20) as  
illustrated in Figure 4.  
2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 14000 16000  
50  
40  
30  
0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04 0.045  
20  
50  
40  
10  
0
30  
-10  
-20  
-30  
-40  
-50  
20  
10  
0
-10  
-20  
-30  
-40  
-50  
-50  
0
50  
-50  
0
50  
Figure 7. Scenario 3 - 87517M56FG.  
Figure 5. Scenario 1 - Single isotropic light source.  
H.A. Quy, P.M. Trien / VNU Journal of Science: Comp. Science & Com. Eng., Vol. 32, No. 3 (2016) 1-10  
7
In a typical run, as the exploration of this  
swarm progresses, the robots move towards  
global best position. As the population size  
increases and the robots have to maintain a  
minimum distance from each other, the swarm  
covers a large area even after convergence. This  
can be seen clearly in Figure 8.  
algorithm is used. The same pattern can be  
observed in every scenario.  
Step: 100 Best Value = 12945.3969  
50  
40  
30  
20  
10  
0
-10  
-20  
-30  
-40  
-50  
Figure 9. Distribution of SC in scenario 1.  
-50  
0
50  
x coordinator  
Figure 8. Final distribution  
of robot swarm - scenario 2.  
3. Results and discussion  
The main results of these simulations are  
summarized in the following figures and tables.  
The results with MPSO - an algorithm from our  
previous work [19] - are also presented for  
comparison. Figure 9-11 display the  
distribution of step of convergence (SC) in each  
scenario after 100 runs. Figure 12-14 show the  
cumulative distribution of SC. Only data from  
successful operations is included.  
Figure 10. Distribution of SC in scenario 2.  
From the figures, it can be concluded that as  
the swarm population increases, the step of  
convergence tends to decrease. However, while  
there is a large gap in performance between the  
5-robot and the 10-robot swarm, there is not  
much improvement when the population  
increases from 10 to 15, regardless which  
H.A. Quy, P.M. Trien / VNU Journal of Science: Comp. Science & Com. Eng., Vol. 32, No. 3 (2016) 1-10  
8
where number of iterations is restricted, due to  
constraints on energy consumption or time,  
success rate at a given maximum iteration may  
become a crucial value to evaluate an  
algorithm. Table 1 provides data regarding this  
value, with the maximum iteration being 100.  
The data in all the figures consistently  
indicates low performance of the 5-robot  
swarm. Both algorithms are not effective for  
swarms of small population. The swarm with  
larger initial coverage is less prone to premature  
convergence.  
APSO is also compared to the multi-search  
algorithm inspired by PSO in the work of Pugh  
et. al. [6]. With the same constraints and  
Figure 11. Distribution of SC in scenario 3.  
conditions on the robot system, the respective  
results are given in Figure 15. Initially, the  
robots are deployed randomly in a square of the  
size 8×8. The target is placed in the center of  
the square. The realistic conditions here are  
wheel slip (10%) and noise (standard normal  
distribution). In such conditions, APSO even  
yields better results. In every case, the result is  
improved when applying APSO.  
When APSO is applied, there are typically  
less outliers and IQRs are smaller than when  
MPSO is applied. We can come to the  
conclusion that APSO is more stable.  
Scenario 1  
1
0.8  
0.6  
0.4  
5 robots  
10 robots  
15 robots  
0.2  
Scenario 2  
0
1
20  
40  
60  
80  
100  
120  
140  
160  
Maximum step allowed - APSO  
0.8  
0.6  
1
0.8  
0.6  
0.4  
0.2  
0
0.4  
5 robots  
10 robots  
15 robots  
0.2  
0
0
50  
100  
150  
200  
250  
5 robots  
10 robots  
15 robots  
Maximum step allowed - APSO  
1
0.8  
0.6  
0.4  
0.2  
0
20  
40  
60  
80  
100  
120  
140  
160  
Maximum step allowed - MPSO  
Figure 12. CDF of SC in scenario 1.  
5 robots  
10 robots  
15 robots  
Figure 12-14 provide the most accurate way  
to evaluate the effectiveness of APSO when  
time (or number of iterations) is limited. In  
general, to achieve the same rate of success,  
APSO requires less iterations than MPSO.  
0
50  
100  
150  
200  
250  
Maximum step allowed - MPSO  
Figure 13. CDF of SC in scenario 2.  
In any scenario, if the maximum iteration is  
100, success rate of APSO approaches 100%  
when the swarm population is 10 or 15. The  
corresponding values of MPSO are all lower. If  
the maximum iteration is less than 50, there is  
little possibility that the swarm could converge,  
no matter which algorithm is chosen. In cases  
H.A. Quy, P.M. Trien / VNU Journal of Science: Comp. Science & Com. Eng., Vol. 32, No. 3 (2016) 1-10  
9
Table 1. Success rate at 100th iteration  
Scenario 3  
1
0.8  
0.6  
0.4  
0.2  
0
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3  
N
A
87  
10 98  
M
77 70  
96 97  
A
M
6
A
84  
M
58  
5
5 robots  
10 robots  
15 robots  
32 100 99  
15 100 98 100 95 100 100  
0
50  
100  
150  
200  
250  
D
Maximum step allowed - APSO  
1
0.8  
0.6  
0.4  
0.2  
0
5 robots  
10 robots  
15 robots  
0
50  
100  
150  
200  
250  
Maximum step allowed - MPSO  
O
Figure 14. CDF of SC in scenario 3.  
3
Simplified  
Realistic  
2.5  
2
1.5  
1
0.5  
0
1
2
3
5
10  
20  
Number of Robots  
a)  
b)  
Figure 15. Distance to target from the swarm’s point of strongest signal detection,  
averaged over 1000 runs a) multi-search algorithm inspired by PSO. b) APSO.  
dynamic deployment of robotic systems, flame  
detection or optical wireless charging.  
However, there are still some drawbacks in  
this algorithm, for example, the swarm is  
unable to detect multiple sources. Furthermore,  
it has yet to be tested in complex scenarios.  
In future works, we will focus on dealing  
with them and applying the algorithm on a  
real MRS.  
4. Conclusion and Future works  
In this paper, a modified PSO algorithm,  
namely APSO, is presented for detecting light  
sources. In this algorithm, APF is integrated  
into PSO and a new velocity component is  
introduced to keep the movement of the swarm  
collision-free. Experimental results in Matlab  
environment have shown good performance,  
compared to previous works. With a high  
success rate, this proposed algorithm is  
promising for some practical problems  
involving the utilization of MRS, such as  
H.A. Quy, P.M. Trien / VNU Journal of Science: Comp. Science & Com. Eng., Vol. 32, No. 3 (2016) 1-10  
10  
[9] B. Nakisa, M. N. Rastgoo, M. F. Nasrudin,  
Acknowledgements  
and M. Z. A. Nazri. "A multi-swarm particle  
swarm optimization with local search on  
multi-robot search system." Journal of  
This work has been supported by Vietnam  
National University, Hanoi, under Project No.  
QG.15.25. This work is dedicated to the 20th  
Anniversary of the IT Faculty of VNU UET.  
Theoretical  
and  
Applied  
Information  
Technology 71, no. 1 (2015): 129-136.  
[10] O. Khatib. "Real-time obstacle avoidance for  
manipulators and mobile robots." The  
international journal of robotics research 5,  
no. 1 (1986): 90-98.  
[11] T. D. Ngo. "LinkMind: Link optimization in  
swarming mobile sensor networks." Sensors  
11, no. 8 (2011): 8180-8202.  
References  
[1] A. Marjovi, J. G. Nunes, L. Marques, and A.  
De Almeida. "Multi-robot exploration and fire  
searching." In Intelligent Robots and Systems,  
2009. IROS 2009. IEEE/RSJ International  
Conference on, pp. 1929-1934. IEEE, 2009.  
[12] A. Howard, M. J. Matarić, and G. S.  
Sukhatme.  
deployment using potential fields:  
distributed, scalable solution to the area  
coverage problem." In Distributed  
"Mobile  
sensor  
network  
[2] H. Ishida, T. Nakamoto, T. Moriizumi, T.  
Kikas, and J. Janata. "Plume-tracking robots:  
A new application of chemical sensors." The  
Biological Bulletin 200, no. 2 (2001): 222-  
226.  
[3] L. Marques, and A. T. de Almeida. "Finding  
odours across large search spaces: A particle  
swarm-based approach." In Climbing and  
Walking Robots, pp. 419-426. Springer Berlin  
Heidelberg, 2005.  
[4] J. Kennedy, and R. Eberhart, “Particle Swarm  
Optimization”, IEEE International Conference  
on Neural Networks (Perth, Australia), IEEE  
Service Center, Piscataway, NJ, IV, pp. 1942-  
1948, 1995.  
[5] Y. Tang, Q. Li, L. Wang, C. Zhang, and Y.  
Yin. "An improved PSO for path planning of  
mobile robots and its parameters discussion."  
A
Autonomous Robotic Systems 5, pp. 299-308.  
Springer Japan, 2002.  
[13] P. Song, and V. Kumar. "A potential field based  
approach to multi-robot manipulation." In Robotics  
and Automation, 2002. Proceedings. ICRA'02.  
IEEE International Conference on, vol. 2, pp. 1217-  
1222. IEEE, 2002.  
[14] M. M. Zavlanos, and G. J. Pappas. "Potential fields  
for maintaining connectivity of mobile networks."  
IEEE Transactions on Robotics, Volume 23, Issue  
4, August 2007, pages 812-816.  
[15] K. Y. Lee, and J. B Park. "Application of  
particle swarm optimization to economic  
dispatch  
problem:  
advantages  
and  
disadvantages." In Power Systems Conference  
and Exposition, 2006. PSCE'06. 2006 IEEE  
PES, pp. 188-192. IEEE, 2006.  
InIntelligent  
Control  
and  
Information  
Processing (ICICIP), 2010 International  
Conference on, pp. 34-38. IEEE, 2010.  
[16] M. S. Couceiro, S. Micael, Rocha R. P., and  
N. M. Ferreira. "A novel multi-robot  
exploration approach based on particle swarm  
optimization algorithms." In Safety, Security,  
and Rescue Robotics (SSRR), 2011 IEEE  
International Symposium on, pp. 327-332.  
IEEE, 2011.  
[6] J. Pugh, and A. Martinoli. "Inspiring and  
modeling multi-robot search with particle  
swarm optimization." In Swarm Intelligence  
Symposium, 2007. SIS 2007. IEEE, pp. 332-  
339. IEEE, 2007.  
[7] S. Doctor, G. K. Venayagamoorthy, and V. G.  
Gudise. "Optimal PSO for collective robotic  
[17] American Electric Lighting, “875 17M 56  
FG”, Photometric Data File, 2008.  
[18] American Electric Lighting, “AVL 1XM AM  
DG”, Photometric Data File, 2008.  
[19] A. Q. Hoang, and M. T. Pham. "Light Source  
Detection using Multirobot Systems with  
Particle Swarm Optimization Approach."  
search  
applications."  
In  
Evolutionary  
Computation, 2004. CEC2004. Congress on,  
vol. 2, pp. 1390-1395. IEEE, 2004.  
[8] Y. Cai, and S. X. Yang. "An improved PSO-based  
approach with dynamic parameter tuning for  
cooperative multi-robot target searching in  
complex unknown environments." International  
Journal of Control 86, no. 10 (2013): 1720-1732.  
In Proceedings  
of  
The  
3rd  
Vietnam  
Conference on Control and Automation, pp.  
448-455. Thai Nguyen, 2015.  
pdf 10 trang yennguyen 13/04/2022 4660
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "Swarm optimization approach for light source detection by multi-robot system", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên

File đính kèm:

  • pdfswarm_optimization_approach_for_light_source_detection_by_mu.pdf