07.08.2015 Views

Modeling Hydra Behavior Using Methods Founded in Behavior-Based Robotics

Modeling Hydra Behavior Using Methods Founded in ... - SAIS

Modeling Hydra Behavior Using Methods Founded in ... - SAIS

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

14 Chapter 4. <strong>Behavior</strong>-based roboticsrules, various modifications of f<strong>in</strong>ite state mach<strong>in</strong>es (FSMs) 2 , and artificial neural networks(ANNs). If-then-else-rules provides a quick way of generat<strong>in</strong>g simple behaviorsby means of hand-cod<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>structions directly <strong>in</strong>to the robotic bra<strong>in</strong>. As a simple exampleconsider a robot that moves straight ahead while there is no object <strong>in</strong> front of it, and stopsat the encounter<strong>in</strong>g of an obstacle. Assum<strong>in</strong>g that conditions for obstacle-detection bythe robot’s sensors, as well as motor signals for the “move forward” and “stop” behaviorshave been def<strong>in</strong>ed, this behavior may be formulated as follows: if no object detected thenmove forward else stop.Biologically <strong>in</strong>spired architectures, such as ANNs, often provide a suitable frameworkfor the generation of robot behaviors by means of EAs. Especially <strong>in</strong> cases where it isdifficult to arrive at an explicit model for a specific behavior, such an approach has anobvious advantage over hand-coded behaviors. A brief <strong>in</strong>troduction to ANNs is provided<strong>in</strong> Appendix B.4.2 Organization of robot behaviorsIn a behavior-based system, the behavioral organizer specifies how the constituent behaviorsare arranged and connected. As mentioned <strong>in</strong> Chapter 1, many methods have alreadybeen suggested, and new architectures cont<strong>in</strong>ue to arise. One way of classify<strong>in</strong>g methodsused for behavior organization, as discussed <strong>in</strong> [49], is to divide them <strong>in</strong>to two ma<strong>in</strong>categories: arbitration methods and command fusion methods, as suggested e.g. byA. Saffiotti [56]. In arbitration methods, only one behavior is active at a time, whereas<strong>in</strong> command fusion methods, the robot’s action is obta<strong>in</strong>ed by comb<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g the results fromseveral behaviors. In both arbitration methods and command fusion methods, severalsub-categories exist, as shown <strong>in</strong> Fig. 4.1 below. In this project, a priority-based arbitrationmethod was used, which will be described <strong>in</strong> Chapter 6. For descriptions of othermethods, see e.g. [1, 49].✘ ✘ ✘ ✘✘ ✘ ✘✘ ✘ ✘❳ ❳ ❳ ❳❳❳ ❳❳❳ ❳ArbitrationCommand fusion ✏ ✏ ✏✏✏✏✏ ✏ ✏✏✏✏ ✁❆✁ ❆✁Priority-based W<strong>in</strong>ner-take-all Superposition ❆Multiple objectiveState-based Fuzzy Vot<strong>in</strong>gFigure 4.1: Classification of methods for behavior organization.2 Examples <strong>in</strong>clude augmented f<strong>in</strong>ite state mach<strong>in</strong>es, used e.g. <strong>in</strong> [8], and generalized f<strong>in</strong>ite state mach<strong>in</strong>es,used e.g. <strong>in</strong> [68].

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!