Swarm behaviors offer scalability and robustness to failure through a decentralized and distributed design. When designing coherent group motion as in swarm flocking, virtual potential functions are a widely used mechanism to ensure the aforementioned properties. However, arbitrating through different virtual potential sources in real-time has proven to be difficult. Such arbitration is often affected by fine tuning of the control parameters used to select among the different sources and by manually set cut-offs used to achieve a balance between stability and velocity. A reliance on parameter tuning makes these methods not ideal for field operations of aerial drones which are characterized by fast non-linear dynamics hindering the stability of potential functions designed for slower dynamics. A situation that is further exacerbated by parameters that are fine-tuned in the lab is often not appropriate to achieve satisfying performances on the field. In this work, we investigate the problem of dynamic tuning of local interactions in a swarm of aerial vehicles with the objective of tackling the stability-velocity trade-off. We let the focal agent autonomously and adaptively decide which source of local information to prioritize and at which degree-for example, which neighbor interaction or goal direction. The main novelty of the proposed method lies in a Gaussian kernel used to regulate the importance of each element in the swarm scheme. Each agent in the swarm relies on such a mechanism at every algorithmic iteration and uses it to tune the final output velocities. We show that the presented approach can achieve cohesive flocking while at the same time navigating through a set of way-points at speed. In addition, the proposed method allows to achieve other desired field properties such as automatic group splitting and joining over long distances. The aforementioned properties have been empirically proven by an extensive set of simulated and field experiments, in communication-full and communication-less scenarios. Moreover, the presented approach has been proven to be robust to failures, intermittent communication, and noisy perceptions.

Autonomous Robotics Research Center Technology Innovation Institute Abu Dhabi United Arab Emirates

Department of Computer Science Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam Netherlands

Department of Cybernetics Czech Technical University Prague Czech

See more in PubMed

Albani D., Manoni T., Martin S., Ferrante E. (2022). “Distributed three dimensional flocking of autonomous drones,” in 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (IEEE; ), 6904–6911.

Ali E. T., Çelikkanat H., Gökçe F., Şahin E. (2008). Self-organized flocking in mobile robot swarms. Swarm Intell. 2 (2), 97–120. 10.1007/s11721-008-0016-2 DOI

Amorim T., Nascimento T., Petracek P., De Masi G., Ferrante E., Martin S. (2021). “Self-organized uav flocking based on proximal control,” in 2021 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS) (IEEE; ), 1374–1382.

Baca T., Petrlik M., Vrba M., Spurny V., Penicka R., Hert D., et al. (2021). The mrs uav system: Pushing the frontiers of reproducible research, real-world deployment, and education with autonomous unmanned aerial vehicles. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 102 (1), 26–28. 10.1007/s10846-021-01383-5 DOI

Bajec I. L., Heppner F. H. (2009). Organized flight in birds. Anim. Behav. 78 (4), 777–789. 10.1016/j.anbehav.2009.07.007 DOI

Balázs B., Vásárhelyi G., Vicsek T. (2020). Adaptive leadership overcomes persistence–responsivity trade-off in flocking. J. R. Soc. Interface 17 (167), 20190853. 10.1098/rsif.2019.0853 PubMed DOI PMC

Coppola M., McGuire K. N., Scheper K. Y. W., Guido C. (2018). On-board communication-based relative localization for collision avoidance in micro air vehicle teams. Auton. Robots 42 (8), 1787–1805. 10.1007/s10514-018-9760-3 PubMed DOI PMC

Coppola M., McGuire K. N., De Wagter C., Guidode Croon C. H. E. (2020). A survey on swarming with micro air vehicles: Fundamental challenges and constraints. Front. Robot. AI 7, 18. 10.3389/frobt.2020.00018 PubMed DOI PMC

Crowther W. J. (2004). Rule-based guidance for flight vehicle flocking. Proc. Institution Mech. Eng. Part G J. Aerosp. Eng. 218 (2), 111–124. 10.1243/0954410041322005 DOI

Cucker F., Smale S. (2007). Emergent behavior in flocks. IEEE Trans. Autom. Contr. 52 (5), 852–862. 10.1109/tac.2007.895842 DOI

Dmytruk A., Nascimento T., Ahmad A., Báča T., Martin S. (2021). “Safe tightly-constrained uav swarming in gnss-denied environments,” in 2021 International Conference on Unmanned Aircraft Systems (ICUAS) (IEEE; ), 1391–1399.

Ferrante E., Turgut A. E., Huepe C., Stranieri A., Pinciroli C., Dorigo M. (2012). Self-organized flocking with a mobile robot swarm: A novel motion control method. Adapt. Behav. 20 (6), 460–477. 10.1177/1059712312462248 DOI

Ferrante E., Turgut A. E., Stranieri A., Pinciroli C., Birattari M., Dorigo M. (2014). A self-adaptive communication strategy for flocking in stationary and non-stationary environments. Nat. Comput. 13 (2), 225–245. 10.1007/s11047-013-9390-9 DOI

Hauert S., Leven S., Varga M., Ruini F., Angelo C., Zufferey J-C., et al. (2011). “Reynolds flocking in reality with fixed-wing robots: Communication range vs. maximum turning rate,” in 2011 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IEEE; ), 5015–5020.

Hung S-M., Givigi S. N. (2016). A q-learning approach to flocking with uavs in a stochastic environment. IEEE Trans. Cybern. 47 (1), 186–197. 10.1109/tcyb.2015.2509646 PubMed DOI

Jia Y., Vicsek T. (2019). Modelling hierarchical flocking. New J. Phys. 21 (9), 093048. 10.1088/1367-2630/ab428e DOI

Kownacki C., Daniel O. (2016). Fixed-wing uavs flock control through cohesion and repulsion behaviours combined with a leadership. Int. J. Adv. Robotic Syst. 13 (1), 36. 10.5772/62249 DOI

Logan E. B., Malikopoulos A. A. (2021). An overview on optimal flocking. Annu. Rev. Control 51, 88–99. 10.1016/j.arcontrol.2021.03.004 DOI

Peters J. (2021). Genesis drone show used a record-breaking 3,281 drones.

Petracek P., Walter V., Baca T., Martin S. (2020). Bio-inspired compact swarms of unmanned aerial vehicles without communication and external localization. Bioinspir. Biomim. 16 (2), 026009. 10.1088/1748-3190/abc6b3 PubMed DOI

Reynolds C. W. (1987). “Flocks, herds and schools: A distributed behavioral model,” in Proceedings of the 14th annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques, 25–34.

Song Y., Naji S., Kaufmann E., Loquercio A., Scaramuzza D. (2021). “Flightmare: A flexible quadrotor simulator,” in Proceedings of the 2020 Conference on Robot Learning, 1147–1157.

Vásárhelyi G., Virágh C., Somorjai G., Nepusz T., Eiben A. E., Vicsek T. (2018). Optimized flocking of autonomous drones in confined environments. Sci. Robot. 3 (20), eaat3536. 10.1126/scirobotics.aat3536 PubMed DOI

Vásárhelyi G., Virágh C., Somorjai G., Tarcai N., Szörényi T., Nepusz T., et al. (2014). “Outdoor flocking and formation flight with autonomous aerial robots,” in 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IEEE; ), 3866–3873.

Walter V., Staub N., Franchi A., Martin S. (2019). Uvdar system for visual relative localization with application to leader–follower formations of multirotor uavs. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 4 (3), 2637–2644. 10.1109/lra.2019.2901683 DOI

Walter V., Staub N., Martin S., Franchi A. (2018). “Mutual localization of uavs based on blinking ultraviolet markers and 3d time-position hough transform,” in 2018 IEEE 14th International Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE), Munich, Germany, 20-24 August 2018 (IEEE CASE; ). 10.1109/COASE.2018.8560384 DOI

Yan C., Wang C., Xiang X., Lan Z., Jiang Y. (2021). Deep reinforcement learning of collision-free flocking policies for multiple fixed-wing uavs using local situation maps. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inf. 18, 1260–1270. 10.1109/tii.2021.3094207 DOI