ABSTRACT
Effective coordination of robots, agents and people promises to improve the safety, robustness and quality with which shared goals are achieved by harnessing the highly heterogeneous entities' diverse capabilities. Proxy-based integration architectures are emerging as a standard method for coordinating teams of heterogeneous entities. Such architectures are designed to meet imposing challenges such as ensuring that the diverse capabilities of the group members are effectively utilized, avoiding miscoordination in a noisy, uncertain environment and reacting flexibly to changes in the environment. However, we contend that previous architectures have gone too far in taking coordination responsibility away from entities and giving it to proxies. Our goal is to create a proxy-based integration infrastructure where there is a beneficial symbiotic relationship between the proxies and the team members. By leveraging the coordination abilities of both proxies and socially capable team members the quality of the coordination can be improved. We present two key new ideas to achieve this goal. First, coordination tasks are represented as explicit roles, hence the responsibilities not the actions are specified, thus allowing the team to leverage the coordination skills of the most capable team members. Second, building on the first idea, we have developed a novel role allocation and reallocation algorithm. These ideas have been realized in a prototype software proxy architecture and used to create heterogeneous teams for an urban disaster recovery domain. Using the rescue domain as a testbed, we have experimented with the role allocation algorithm and observed results to support the hypothesis that leveraging the coordination capabilities of people can help the performance of the team.
- J. Casper and R. Murphy. Workflow study on human-robot interaction in usar. In International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pages 1997--2003, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Hans Chalupsky, Yolanda Gil, Craig A. Knoblock, Kristina Lerman, Jean Oh, David V. Pynadath, Thomas A. Russ, and Milind Tambe. Electric Elves: Agent technology for supporting human organizations. AI Magazine, 23(2):11--24, 2002.Google Scholar
- Philip R. Cohen and Hector J. Levesque. Teamwork. Nous, 25(4):487--512, 1991.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brian P. Gerkey and Maja J Mataric. Sold!: Auction methods for multi-robot coordination. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, Special Issue on Multi-robot Systems, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. Grosz and S. Kraus. Collaborative plans for complex group actions. Artificial Intelligence, 86:269--358, 1996. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Luke Huhnsberger and Barbara Grosz. A combinatorial auction for collaborative planning. In Proceedings of the International Conference on MultiAgent Systems, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- N. Jennings. Controlling cooperative problem solving in industrial multi-agent systems using joint intentions. Artificial Intelligence, 75, 1995. Google ScholarDigital Library
- Henry L. Jones, Stephen M. Rock, Dennis Burns, and Steve Morris. Autonomous robots in swat applications: Research, design, and operations challenges. In AUVSI '02, 2002.Google Scholar
- Hiroaki Kitano, Satoshi Tadokoro, Itsuki Noda, Hitoshi Matsubara, Tomoichi Takahashi, Atsushi Shinjoh, and Susumu Shimada. Robocup rescue: Searh and rescue in large-scale disasters as a domain for autonomous agents research. In Proc. 1999 IEEE Intl. Conf. on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, volume VI, pages 739--743, Tokyo, October 1999.Google ScholarCross Ref
- D. Kortenkamp, G. Dorias, and K. Myers, editors. Proceedings of IJCAI99 Workshop on Adjustable Autonomy Systems, August 1999.Google Scholar
- D. Kortenkamp, D. Schreckenghost, and C. Martin. User interaction with multi-robot systems. In Proceedings of Workshop on Multi-Robot Systems, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- P. J. Modi, H. Jung, W. Shen, M. Tambe, and S. Kulkarni. A dynamic distributed constraint satisfaction approach to resource allocation. In Proc of Constraint Programming, 2001. Google ScholarDigital Library
- E. Ostergaard, M. Mataric, and G. Sukhatme. Multi-robot task allocation in the light of uncertainty. In IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pages 3002--3007, 2002.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Lynne E. Parker. Alliance: An architecture for fault tolerant multi-robot cooperation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 14(2):220--240, 1998.Google ScholarCross Ref
- David Pynadath and Milind Tambe. Multiagent teamwork: Analyzing the optimality and complexity of key theories and models. In First International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems (AAMAS'02), 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- David V. Pynadath and Milind Tambe. An automated teamwork infrastructure for heterogeneous software agents and humans. Journal of Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, Special Issue on Infrastructure and Requirements for Building Research Grade Multi-Agent Systems, page to appear, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- D.V. Pynadath, M. Tambe, N. Chauvat, and L. Cavedon. Toward team-oriented programming. In Intelligent Agents VI: Agent Theories, Architectures, and Languages, pages 233--247, 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Rich and C. Sidner. COLLAGEN: When agents collaborate with people. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Autonomous Agents (Agents'97), 1997. Google ScholarDigital Library
- K. Seow and K. How. Collaborative assignment: A multiagent negotiation approach using bdi concepts. In Proceedings of AAMAS'02, pages 256--263, 2002. Google ScholarDigital Library
- P. Stone and M. Veloso. Task decomposition, dynamic role assignment, and low bandwidth communication for real-time stategic teamwork. Artificial Intelligence, 110(2):241--273, June, 1999. Google ScholarDigital Library
- C. Thorpe T. Fong and C. Baur. Advanced interfaces for vehicle teleoperation: collaborative control, sensor fusion displays, and web-based tools. In Vehicle Teleoperation Interfaces Workshop, IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, San Fransisco, CA, April , 2000.Google Scholar
- M. Tambe. Towards flexible teamwork. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research, 7:83--124, 1997. Google ScholarCross Ref
- Katia Sycara Terry Payne and Michael Lewis. Varying the user interaction within multiagent systems. In Agents'00, pages 412--418, 2000. Google ScholarDigital Library
- G. Tidhar, A.S. Rao, and E.A. Sonenberg. Guided team selection. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Multi-Agent Systems, 1996.Google Scholar
- Gil Tidhar. Team-oriented programming: Preliminary report. Technical Report 41, Australian Artificial Intelligence Institute, 1993.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- A prototype infrastructure for distributed robot-agent-person teams
Recommendations
Distributed Heterogeneous Robot-Human Teams: Robotics Track
AAMAS '19: Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent SystemsWe introduce a novel, scalable, distributed decision-making algorithm using factor graphs and the sum product algorithm to control the coordination of a heterogeneous multi-robot team in exploration tasks. In addition, our algorithm supports seamless ...
Towards Heterogeneous Agent Teams
EASSS '01: Selected Tutorial Papers from the 9th ECCAI Advanced Course ACAI 2001 and Agent Link's 3rd European Agent Systems Summer School on Multi-Agent Systems and ApplicationsAgent integration architectures enable a heterogeneous, distributed set of agents to work together to address problems of greater complexity than those addressed by the individual agents themselves. Unfortunately, integrating software agents and humans ...
Lifelong Adaptation in Heterogeneous Multi-Robot Teams: Response to Continual Variation in Individual Robot Performance
Generating teams of robots that are able to perform their tasks over long periods of time requires the robots to be responsive to continual changes in robot team member capabilities and to changes in the state of the environment and mission. In this ...
Comments