Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39902260›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in robotics and AI2024

Heterogeneous foraging swarms can be better.

Gal A Kaminka, Yinon Douchan

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in robotics and AI, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Swarms can be rational.Philosophical transactions. Series A, Mathematical, physical, and engineering sciences · 2025
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Gal A KaminkaDepartment of Computer Science, Gonda Brain Research Center, and Nanotechnology Center, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.
Yinon DouchanDepartment of Computer Science, Gonda Brain Research Center, and Nanotechnology Center, Bar Ilan University, Ramat Gan, Israel.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Inspired by natural phenomena, generations of researchers have been investigating how a swarm of robots can act coherently and purposefully, when individual robots can only sense and communicate with nearby peers, with no means of global communications and coordination. In this paper, we will show that swarms can perform better, when they self-adapt to admit heterogeneous behavior roles. Methods: We model a foraging swarm task as an extensive-form fully-cooperative game, in which the swarm reward is an additive function of individual contributions (the sum of collected items). To maximize the swarm reward, previous work proposed using distributed reinforcement learning, where each robot adapts its own collision-avoidance decisions based on the Effectiveness Index reward ( Results: To address this, we derive a reward function from a game-theoretic view of swarm foraging as a fully-cooperative, unknown horizon repeating game. We demonstrate analytically that the total coordination overhead of the swarm (total time spent on collision-avoidance, rather than foraging per-se) is directly tied to the total utility of the swarm: less overhead, more items collected. Treating every collision as a stage in the repeating game, the overhead is bounded by the total Discussion: While the theoretical analysis clarifies both assumptions and gaps with respect to the reality of robots, experiments with real and simulated robots empirically demonstrate the efficacy of the approach in practice, and the importance of behavioral (decision-making) diversity in optimizing swarm goals.

Indexed as

difference rewardforaginggame theoryheterogeneous robotsmarginal contributionmulti-agent reinforcement learningrobot diversityswarm robotics

Identifiers

PMID39902260
PMCPMC11788533

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.