Simulation of a Bio-Inspired Flocking-Based Aggregation Behaviour in Swarm Robotics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a biologically inspired flocking-based aggregation behaviour of a swarm of mobile robots. Aggregation behaviour is essential to many swarm systems, such as swarm robotics systems, in order to accomplish complex tasks that are impossible for a single agent. In this work, we developed a robot controller using Reynolds' flocking rules to coordinate the movements of multiple e-puck robots during the aggregation process. To improve aggregation behaviour among these robots and address the scalability issues in current flocking-based aggregation approaches, we proposed using a K-means algorithm to identify clusters of agents. Using the developed controller, we simulated the aggregation behaviour among the swarm of robots. Five experiments were conducted using Webots simulation software. The performance of the developed system was evaluated under a variety of environments and conditions, such as various obstacles, agent failure, different numbers of robots, and arena sizes. The results of the experiments demonstrated that the proposed algorithm is robust and scalable. Moreover, we compared our proposed algorithm with another implementation of the flocking-based self-organizing aggregation behaviour based on Reynolds' rules in a swarm of e-puck robots. Our algorithm outperformed this method in terms of cohesion performance and aggregation completion time.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 it