Artificial Life and Robotics

, Volume 23, Issue 4, pp 609–617 | Cite as

Trophallaxis with predetermined energy threshold for enhanced performance in swarms of scavenger robots

  • Choladawan MoonjaitaEmail author
  • Hemma Philamore
  • Fumitoshi Matsuno
Original Article


We present an agent-based simulation of a group of robots that source their energy from their surrounding environment. The robots forage their energy from localised sources, distributed in their surrounding environment and share energy with each other through “trophallaxis”. We investigate the effect of energy loss during energy transfer by considering two model configurations. In the first configuration, neighbouring pairs of robots shared the sum of their combined energy equally, at each time-step, without considering the energy levels of each robot. In contrast, in the second configuration, only donor and recipient robots averaged their energy. The roles of donor and recipient were defined by predetermined energy thresholds. Levy walk behaviour was employed to improve foraging ability. The results show that bio-inspired trophallaxis and Levy walk enhances the performance of the groups of scavenger robots. Our results indicate that trophallaxis is particularly effective considering energy loss during energy transfer. This suggests us the possibility to apply the trophallaxis models to the real robot systems where energy loss occurs during energy transfer.


Trophallaxis Scavenger robots Swarm robotics Energy sharing Energy sustainable Levy-walk behaviour 


  1. 1.
    Greenwald E, Segre E, Feinerman O (2015) Simultaneous measurement of interaction patterns and food dissemination. Sci Rep 5:12496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Witkowski M (2007) Energy sharing for swarms modeled on the common vampire bat. Adapt Behav 15(3):307–328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Camazine S, Crailsheim K, Hrassnigg N, Robinson GE, Leonhard B, Kropiunigg H (1998) Protein trophallaxis and the regulation of pollen foraging by honey bees (Apis mellifera L.). Apidologie 29:113–126CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Holldobler B, Wilson EO (1990) The ants. Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, CambrigeCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Moritz RFA, Hallmen M (1986) Trophallaxis of worker honeybees (Apis mellifera L.) of different ages. Insectes Sociaus 33:26–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Melhuish C, Kubo M (2007) Collective energy distribution: maintaining the energy balance in distributed autonomous robots using trophallaxis. Distrib Auton Robot Syst 6:275–284zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ngo TD, Schiler H (2008) Truly autonomous robots: hardware design for an energy trophallactic robot. Artif Life Robot 12:335–345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Wilkinson S (2001) Hungry for success-future directions in gastrobotics research. Ind Robot Int J 28(3):213–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ieropoulos I, Greenman J, Melhuish C. R, Horsfield I (2010) EcoBot-III: a robot with guts. In: The 12th international conference on the synthesis and simulation of living systems, pp 733–740Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Melhuish C, Ieropoulos I, Greenman J (2006) Energetically autonomous robots: food for thought. Auton Robots 21:187–198CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cole BJ (1995) Fractal time in animal behavior: the movement activity of Drosophila. Anim Behav 50:1317–1324CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Viswanathan GM, Bartumeus F, Buldyrev SV, Catalan J, Fulco UL, Havlin S, da Luz MGE, Lyra ML, Raposo EP, Stanley HE (2002) Lvy flight random searches in biological phenomena. Phys A 314:208–213MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bartumeus F, Catalan J, Fulco UL, Lyra ML, Viswanathan GM (2002) Optimizing the encounter rate in biological interactions: Levy versus Brownian strategies. Phys Rev Lett 88:097901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nurzaman SG, Matsumoto Y, Nakamura Y, Koizumi S, Ishiguro H (2009) Biologically inspired adaptive mobile robot search with and without gradient sensing. In: 2009 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 142–147Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fujisawa R, Dobata S (2013) Levy walk enhances efficiency of group foraging in pheromone communicating swarm robots. In: Symposium on system integration, pp 808–813Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sutantyo DK, Kernbach S, Nepomnyashchikh VA, Levi P (2010) Multi-robot searching algorithm using Levy flight and artificial potential field. In: IEEE international workshop on safety security and rescue roboticsGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kubo M, Melhuish C (2004) Robot trophallaxis: managing energy autonomy in multiple robots. In: Proceedings of towards autonomous robotics system, pp 77-84Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Philamore H, Moonjaita C, Matsuno F (2017) Trophallaxis for group energy distribution in swarms of scavenger robots. In: The 2nd international symposium on swarm behavior and bio-inspired roboticsGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© ISAROB 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Choladawan Moonjaita
    • 1
    Email author
  • Hemma Philamore
    • 1
  • Fumitoshi Matsuno
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering and Science, Graduate School of EngineeringKyoto UniversityKyotoJapan

Personalised recommendations