Hostname: page-component-74656f9884-2dmjx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-07T11:34:37.525Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Exploring the Performance of Natural Search Strategies for the Control of Unmanned Autonomous Vehicles

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2009

Alec Banks*
Affiliation:
(Software Systems Research Centre, Bournemouth University, UK)
Jonathan Vincent
Affiliation:
(Software Systems Research Centre, Bournemouth University, UK)
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper builds on prior research into the application of particle swarm optimisation to autonomous vehicle control in search roles. It examines the use of naturally inspired search strategies to enhance the performance of groups of sensor-based vehicles in applications where there is no knowledge a priori regarding target presence, location, distribution or behaviour (movement). This paper first briefly reviews existing ethological research into search strategies in the natural world, identifying three types of random walk, two multi-phase strategies and two species-specific strategies for further investigation. Experiments are then performed within a simulation environment to compare the performance of naturally inspired strategies with deterministic patterns and random movement, when searching for both static and dynamic targets. Results indicate that performance improvements can be realised, provided that critical relationships within the application domain broadly match those existing in the underlying natural metaphor.

Information

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Royal Institute of Navigation 2009
Figure 0

Figure 1. Typical movement pattern produced by, left: Brownian movement search and ACS (intensive phase); right: Lévy path search.

Figure 1

Figure 2. Typical movement pattern produced by, left: straight line search and ACS (extensive phase); right: saltatory search (note: dark points on route highlight points where the agent paused and searched intensely).

Figure 2

Figure 3. Typical movement pattern produced by bacterial search, left: no targets detected; right: targets detected.

Figure 3

Figure 4. Typical movement pattern produced by, left: fruit fly search; right: random search.

Figure 4

Figure 5. Deterministic search patterns (left: spiral, right: systematic grid).

Figure 5

Figure 6. Efficiency test initialisation.

Figure 6

Figure 7. Locate only strategies against static uniformly distributed targets.

Figure 7

Figure 8. Locate only strategies against static clustered targets.

Figure 8

Figure 9. Locate and destroy strategies against static uniformly distributed targets.

Figure 9

Figure 10. Locate and destroy strategies against static clustered targets.

Figure 10

Figure 11. Mean rankings of 10 agents against 4 targets moving deterministically.

Figure 11

Figure 12. Mean rankings of 10 agents against 4 targets moving randomly.

Figure 12

Figure 13. Mean rankings of 10 agents against 4 Brownian motion targets.

Figure 13

Figure 14. Mean rankings of 10 agents against 4 fruit fly targets.

Figure 14

Figure 15. Mean time for 10 agents to destroy 4 targets moving at maximum agent speed.

Figure 15

Figure 16. Mean rankings of 20 agents against 4 targets moving deterministically.

Figure 16

Figure 17. Mean rankings of 20 agents against 4 targets moving randomly.

Figure 17

Figure 18. Mean rankings of 20 agents against 4 Brownian motion targets.

Figure 18

Figure 19. Mean rankings of 20 agents against 4 fruit fly targets.

Figure 19

Table 1. Mean energy consumption.

Figure 20

Figure 20. Effect of GUT on destroying 20 uniformly distributed and clustered targets by 5 agents employing ACS strategy.