skip to main content
research-article

Agent fitness functions for evolving coordinated sensor networks

Published: 12 July 2011 Publication History

Abstract

Distributed sensor networks are an attractive area for research in agent systems. This is due primarily to the level of information available in applications where sensing technology has improved dramatically. These include energy systems and area coverage where it is desirable for sensor networks to have the ability to self-organize and be robust to changes in network structure. The challenges presented when investigating distributed sensor networks for such applications include the need for small sensor packages that are still capable of making good decisions to cover areas where multiple types of information may be present. For example in energy systems, singular areas in power plants may produce several types of valuable information, such as temperature, pressure, or chemical indicators.
The approach of the work presented in this paper provides agent fitness functions for use with a neuro-evolutionary algorithm to address some of these challenges. In particular, we show that for self-organization and robustness to network changes, it is more advantageous to evolve individual policies, rather than a shared policy that all sensor units utilize. Further, we show that using a difference objective approach to the decomposition of system-level fitness functions provides a better target for evolving these individual policies. This is because the difference evaluation for fitness provides a cleaner signal, while maintaining vital information from the system level that implicitly promotes coordination among individual sensor units in the network.

References

[1]
A. K. Agogino and K. Tumer. Efficient evaluation functions for evolving coordination. Evolutionary Computation, 16(2):257--288, 2008.
[2]
M. Ahmadi and P. Stone. A multi-robot system for continuous area sweeping tasks. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Robotics and Automation, pages 1724--1729, May 2006.
[3]
I. F. Akyildiz, W. Su, Y. Sankarasubramaniam, and E. Cayirci. A survey on sensor networks. IEEE Communications Magazine 40, 8, 2002.
[4]
M. H. Bowling, R. M. Jensen, and M. M. Veloso. Planning in Intelligent Systems: Aspects, Motivations and Methods. John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2005.
[5]
N. Bulusu, D. Estrin, L. Girod, and J. Heidemann. Scalable Coordination for Wireless Sensor Networks: Self-Configuring Localization Systems. In Proceedings of the Sixth International Symposium on Communication Theory and Applications ISCTA01, 2001.
[6]
S. S. Dhillon and K. Chakrabarty. Sensor Placement for Effective Coverage and Surveillance in Distributed Sensor Networks. In Proc. of IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, pages 1609--1614, 2003.
[7]
D. Goldberg and M. J. Mataric. Maximizing reward in a non-stationary mobile robot environment. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 3(6):281--316, 2003.
[8]
C. Guestrin, M. Lagoudakis, and R. Parr. Coordinated reinforcement learning. In Int. Conference on Machine Learning, pages 41--48, 2002.
[9]
A. Howard, M. J. Mataric, and G. S. Sukhatme. An incremental self-deployment algorithm for mobile sensor networks. Autonomous Robots, 13(2):113--126, 2002.
[10]
A. Howard, M. J. Matarić, and G. S. Sukhatme. Mobile Sensor Network Deployment using Potential Fields: A Distributed, Scalable Solution to the Area Coverage Problem. In Proc. Int. Conf. Distributed Autonomous Robotic Systems, 2002.
[11]
C.-F. Huang and Y.-C. Tseng. The Coverage Problem in a Wireless Sensor Network. Mobile Networks and Applications, v.10, n.4, 2005.
[12]
M. Knudson and K. Tumer. Coevolution of heterogeneous multi-robot teams. In Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (GECCO), 2010.
[13]
V. Lesser, C. L. O. Jr., and M. Tambe. Distributed Sensor Networks - A Multiagent Perspective. Kluwer Academic Publishers, 2003.
[14]
B. Liu and D. Towsley. A Study of the Coverage of Large-scale Sensor Networks. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Mobile Ad-hoc and Sensor Systems (MASS04), Fort Lauderdale, FL, pages 475--483, 2004.
[15]
S. Meguerdichian, F. Koushanfar, M. Potkonjak, and M. B. Srivastava. Coverage Problems in Wireless Ad-hoc Sensor Networks. In IEEE INFOCOM, pages 1380--1387, 2001.
[16]
D. Moriarty and R. Miikkulainen. Forming Neural Networks through Efficient and Adaptive Coevolution. Evolutionary Computation, 5, 1998.
[17]
D. Parkes and S. Singh. An MDP-based approach to online mechanism design. In NIPS 16, pages 791--798, 2004.
[18]
C. Roth. Agent Objectives for Evolving Coordinated Sensor Networks. Master's thesis, University of Applied Sciences Offenburg - in association with Oregon State University, 2010.
[19]
S. J. Russel and P. Norvig. Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach. Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1995.
[20]
P. Scerri, J. Giampapa, and K. Sycara. Techniques and directions for building very large agent teams. In Int. Conference on Integration of Knowledge Intensive Multi-Agent Systems, KIMAS, pages 79--84, 2005.
[21]
P. Stone, R. S. Sutton, and G. Kuhlmann. Reinforcement learning for RoboCup-soccer keepaway. Adaptive Behavior, 13(3):165--188, 2005.
[22]
L. Tong, Q. Zhao, and S. Adireddy. Sensor Networks with Mobile Agents. In Proc. 2003 Military Communications Intl Symp, pages 688--693, 2003.
[23]
J. Wang, M. Lewis, and P. Scerri. Cooperating robots for search and rescue. In Agent Technology for Disaster Management Workshop at AAMAS'06, 2006.
[24]
X. Zheng, S. Jain, S. Koenig, and D. Kempe. Forest-based multirobot coverage. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pages 2318--2323, 2005.

Cited By

View all
  • (2018)Fitness function improvement of evolutionary algorithms used in sensor network optimisationsIET Networks10.1049/iet-net.2017.02517:3(91-94)Online publication date: May-2018

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
GECCO '11: Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation
July 2011
2140 pages
ISBN:9781450305570
DOI:10.1145/2001576
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]

Sponsors

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 12 July 2011

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Author Tags

  1. agent fitness
  2. distributed sensor network
  3. neuro-evolution

Qualifiers

  • Research-article

Conference

GECCO '11
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 1,669 of 4,410 submissions, 38%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)1
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 23 Oct 2024

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2018)Fitness function improvement of evolutionary algorithms used in sensor network optimisationsIET Networks10.1049/iet-net.2017.02517:3(91-94)Online publication date: May-2018

View Options

Get Access

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media