ArticlePeerJ. Computer science2020
Automatic modular design of robot swarms using behavior trees as a control architecture.
Article in PeerJ. Computer science, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Recent trends in robot learning and evolution for swarm robotics.Frontiers in robotics and AI · 2023Review
- On Using Simulation to Predict the Performance of Robot Swarms.Scientific data · 2022Article
- Towards an integrated automatic design process for robot swarms.Open research Europe · 2021Article
- Automatic modular design of robot swarms using behavior trees as a control architecture.PeerJ. Computer science · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We investigate the possibilities, challenges, and limitations that arise from the use of behavior trees in the context of the automatic modular design of collective behaviors in swarm robotics. To do so, we introduce Maple, an automatic design method that combines predefined modules-low-level behaviors and conditions-into a behavior tree that encodes the individual behavior of each robot of the swarm. We present three empirical studies based on two missions: aggregation and Foraging. To explore the strengths and weaknesses of adopting behavior trees as a control architecture, we compare Maple with Chocolate, a previously proposed automatic design method that uses probabilistic finite state machines instead. In the first study, we assess Maple's ability to produce control software that crosses the reality gap satisfactorily. In the second study, we investigate Maple's performance as a function of the design budget, that is, the maximum number of simulation runs that the design process is allowed to perform. In the third study, we explore a number of possible variants of Maple that differ in the constraints imposed on the structure of the behavior trees generated. The results of the three studies indicate that, in the context of swarm robotics, behavior trees might be appealing but in many settings do not produce better solutions than finite state machines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.