Controlling Collision-Induced Aggregations in a Swarm of Micro Bristle Robots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Systematically designing local interaction rules to achieve collective behaviors in robot swarms is a challenging endeavor, especially in micro robots, where size restrictions imply severe sensing, communication, and computation limitations. In such robot swarms, performing useful functions is often preconditioned on the formation of high-density aggregations which can facilitate collective signaling and information sharing. In this article, we present a systematic approach to control aggregation behaviors by leveraging the physical interactions in a swarm of 300 3-mm vibration-driven micro bristle robots that we designed and fabricated. We demonstrate the ability to control the degree of aggregation by varying the motility characteristics of the robots through global vibration frequency and amplitude inputs, after comprehensive characterization, modeling, and simulation of the locomotion dynamics and robot interactions. To quantify the degree of aggregation, we also introduce a new metric, the motility-induced phase separation index index, which unlike many existing methods does not require a scenario-specific tuning of parameters. Our investigations reveal how physics-driven interaction mechanisms can be exploited to achieve desired behaviors in minimally equipped robot swarms and highlight the specific ways in which hardware and software developments aid in the achievement of collision-induced aggregations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".