single-rb.php

JRM Vol.20 No.3 pp. 386-393
doi: 10.20965/jrm.2008.p0386
(2008)

Paper:

Adaptive Modular Robots Through Heterogeneous Inter-Module Connections

Masahiro Shimizu*, Takuma Kato*, Max Lungarella**,
and Akio Ishiguro*

*Department of Electrical and Communication Engineering, Tohoku University, 6-6-05 Aoba, Aramaki, Aoba-ku, Sendai 980-8579, Japan

**Artificial Intelligence Laboratory, University of Zurich, 8050 Zurich, Switzerland

Received:
September 28, 2007
Accepted:
March 9, 2008
Published:
June 20, 2008
Keywords:
mobiligence, modular robot, heterogeneity, emergence, ecological balance
Abstract

Modular robots are mechatronic systems that can rearrange their connectivity to create new topologies to accomplish diverse tasks. In previous work, we have studied a modular reconfigurable robot (Slimebot) characterized by a spontaneous inter-module connection control mechanism. The modules of Slimebot connect to each other via a functional material which guarantees physical coupling between the modules. Here, we investigate the effect of heterogeneous inter-module coupling strengths on the adaptivity of Slimebot (here measured in terms of structural stability and locomotive speed). Simulation results show that a certain amount of heterogeneity improves the adaptivity of the system compared to the case of homogeneous modules. The only assumption that needs to be satisfied by the system with heterogeneous couplings is compliance to Steinberg’s energy minimization theory.

Cite this article as:
Masahiro Shimizu, Takuma Kato, Max Lungarella, and
and Akio Ishiguro, “Adaptive Modular Robots Through Heterogeneous Inter-Module Connections,” J. Robot. Mechatron., Vol.20, No.3, pp. 386-393, 2008.
Data files:
References
  1. [1] M. Yim, W. -E. Shen, B. Salemi, D. Rus, M. Moll, H. Lipson, E. Klavins, and G. S. Chirikjian, “Modular self-reconfigurable robot systems,” IEEE Robotics and Systems Magazine, Vol.3, pp. 43-53, 2007.
  2. [2] V. Zykov, M. Efstathios, M. Desnoyer, and H. Lipson, “Evolved and designed self-reproducing modular robotics,” IEEE Trans. on Robotics, Vol.23, No.2, pp. 308-319, 2007.
  3. [3] M.Yim, C. Eldershaw, Y. Zhang, and D. Duff, “Self-reconfigurable robot systems: PolyBot,” J. of Robotics Society of Japan, Vol.21, No.8, pp. 851-854, 2003.
  4. [4] A. Castano, W. -M. Shen, and P.Will, “CONRO: Towards miniature self-sufficient metamorphic robots,” Autonomous Robots, pp. 309-324, 2000.
  5. [5] S. Murata, K. Kakomura, and H. Kurokawa, “Docking experiments of a modular robot by visual feedback,” Proc. of Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 625-630, 2006.
  6. [6] A. Ishiguro, M. Shimizu, and T. Kawakatsu, “Don’t try to control everything! An emergent morphology control of a modular robot,” Proc. of Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 981-985, 2004.
  7. [7] G. Beni and J. Wang, “Theoretical Problems for the Realization of Distributed Robotic Systems,” Proc. of Int. Conf. on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp. 1914-1920, 1991.
  8. [8] M. S. Steinberg, “Reconstruction of tissues by dissociated cells,” Science, Vol.141, No.3579, pp. 401-408, 1963.
  9. [9] F. Graner and J. A. Glazier, “Simulation of biological cell sorting using a two-dimensional extended Potts model,” Physical Review Letters, Vol.69, No.13, pp.2013-2016, 1992.
  10. [10] A. Ishiguro and T. Kawakatsu, “How Should Control and Body Systems be Coupled? —A Robotic Case Study— , Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Eds. F. Iida, R. Pfeifer, L. Steels, and Y. Kuniyoshi),” Springer, pp. 107-118, 2004.

*This site is desgined based on HTML5 and CSS3 for modern browsers, e.g. Chrome, Firefox, Safari, Edge, Opera.

Last updated on Sep. 24, 2021