Research Papers

Cloud-Supported Coverage Control for Persistent Surveillance Missions

[+] Author and Article Information
Jeffrey R. Peters

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of California,
Santa Barbara, CA 93106
e-mail: jrpeters@engr.ucsb.edu

Sean J. Wang

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of California,
Santa Barbara, CA 93106
e-mail: seanwang@umail.ucsb.edu

Amit Surana

Systems Department,
United Technologies Research Center,
East Hartford, CT 06118
e-mail: suranaa@utrc.utc.com

Francesco Bullo

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of California,
Santa Barbara, CA 93106
e-mail: bullo@engr.ucsb.edu

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Dynamic Systems Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS, MEASUREMENT, AND CONTROL. Manuscript received October 25, 2016; final manuscript received January 18, 2017; published online May 24, 2017. Assoc. Editor: Jongeun Choi.

J. Dyn. Sys., Meas., Control 139(8), 081011 (May 24, 2017) (12 pages) Paper No: DS-16-1514; doi: 10.1115/1.4035874 History: Received October 25, 2016; Revised January 18, 2017

A cloud-supported coverage control scheme is proposed for multi-agent, persistent surveillance missions. This approach decouples assignment from motion planning operations in a modular framework. Coverage assignments and surveillance parameters are managed on the cloud and transmitted to mobile agents via unplanned and asynchronous exchanges. These updates promote load-balancing, while also allowing effective pairing with typical path planners. Namely, when paired with a planner satisfying mild assumptions, the scheme ensures that (i) coverage regions remain connected and collectively cover the environment, (ii) regions may go uncovered only over bounded intervals, (iii) collisions (sensing overlaps) are avoided, and (iv) for time-invariant event likelihoods, a Pareto optimal configuration is produced in finite time. The scheme is illustrated in simulated missions.

Copyright © 2017 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Macwan, A. , Nejat, G. , and Benhabib, B. , 2011, “ Target-Motion Prediction for Robotic Search and Rescue in Wilderness Environments,” IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern., 41(5), pp. 1287–1298. [CrossRef]
Smith, R. N. , Chao, Y. , Li, P. P. , Caron, D. A. , Jones, B. H. , and Sukhatme, G. S. , 2010, “Planning and Implementing Trajectories for Autonomous Underwater Vehicles to Track Evolving Ocean Processes Based on Predictions From a Regional Ocean Model,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 29(12), pp. 1475–1497. [CrossRef]
Dixon, S. R. , and Wickens, C. D. , 2006, “Automation Reliability in Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Control: A Reliance-Compliance Model of Automation Dependence in High Workload,” Hum. Factors, 48(3), pp. 474–486. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Pereira, A. , Heidarsson, H. , Oberg, C. , Caron, D. , Jones, B. , and Sukhatme, G. , 2010, “A Communication Framework for Cost-Effective Operation of AUVs in Coastal Regions,” Field and Service Robotics (Tracts in Advanced Robotics), Vol. 62, A. Howard , K. Iagnemma , and A. Kelly , eds., Springer, Berlin, pp. 433–442. [CrossRef]
Shah, R. C. , Roy, S. , Jain, S. , and Brunette, W. , 2003, “Data MULEs: Modeling and Analysis of a Three-Tier Architecture for Sparse Sensor Networks,” Ad Hoc Networks, 1(2–3), pp. 215–233. [CrossRef]
Peters, J. , Srivastava, V. , Taylor, G. , Surana, A. , Eckstein, M. P. , and Bullo, F. , 2015, “Mixed Human-Robot Team Surveillance: Integrating Cognitive Modeling With Engineering Design,” IEEE Control Syst. Mag., 35(6), pp. 57–80. [CrossRef]
Pasqualetti, F. , Durham, J. W. , and Bullo, F. , 2012, “Cooperative Patrolling Via Weighted Tours: Performance Analysis and Distributed Algorithms,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 28(5), pp. 1181–1188. [CrossRef]
Srivastava, V. , Pasqualetti, F. , and Bullo, F. , 2013, “Stochastic Surveillance Strategies for Spatial Quickest Detection,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 32(12), pp. 1438–1458. [CrossRef]
Mathew, N. , Smith, S. L. , and Waslander, S. L. , 2015, “Multirobot Rendezvous Planning for Recharging in Persistent Tasks,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 31(1), pp. 128–142. [CrossRef]
Mathew, G. , and Mezić, I. , 2011, “Metrics for Ergodicity and Design of Ergodic Dynamics for Multi-Agent Systems,” Physica D, 240(4), pp. 432–442. [CrossRef]
Nigam, N. , 2014, “The Multiple Unmanned Air Vehicle Persistent Surveillance Problem: A Review,” Machines, 2(1), pp. 13–72. [CrossRef]
Patel, R. , Frasca, P. , Durham, J. W. , Carli, R. , and Bullo, F. , 2016, “Dynamic Partitioning and Coverage Control With Asynchronous One-to-Base-Station Communication,” IEEE Trans. Control Network Syst., 3(1), pp. 24–33. [CrossRef]
Peng, J. , and Akella, S. , 2005, “Coordinating Multiple Robots With Kinodynamic Constraints Along Specified Paths,” Int. J. Rob. Res., 24(4), pp. 295–310. [CrossRef]
Gerkey, B. P. , and Matarić, M. J. , 2002, “Sold!: Auction Methods for Multirobot Coordination,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 18(5), pp. 758–768. [CrossRef]
Bonabeau, E. , Dorigo, M. , and Theraulaz, G. , 1999, Swarm Intelligence: From Natural to Artificial Systems (Santa Fe Institute Studies in the Sciences of Complexity), Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.
Reif, J. H. , and Wang, H. , 1999, “Social Potential Fields: A Distributed Behavioral Control for Autonomous Robots,” Rob. Auton. Syst., 27(3), pp. 171–194. [CrossRef]
Kariotoglou, N. , Raimondo, D. , Summers, S. J. , and Lygeros, J. , 2015, “ Multi-Agent Autonomous Surveillance: A Framework Based on Stochastic Reachability and Hierarchical Task Allocation,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 137(3), p. 031008. [CrossRef]
Shima, T. , and Pagilla, P. R. , 2007, “Special Issue on Analysis and Control of Multi-Agent Dynamic Systems,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 129(5), pp. 569–570. [CrossRef]
Almeida, A. , Ramalho, G. , Santana, H. , Tedesco, P. , Menezes, T. , Corruble, V. , and Chevaleyre, Y. , 2004, “Recent Advances on Multi-Agent Patrolling,” Advances in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 3171, Springer, Berlin, pp. 474–483. [CrossRef]
Pasqualetti, F. , Zanella, F. , Peters, J. R. , Spindler, M. , Carli, R. , and Bullo, F. , 2014, “Camera Network Coordination for Intruder Detection,” IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol., 22(5), pp. 1669–1683. [CrossRef]
Latombe, J.-C. , 1991, Robot Motion Planning, Springer, Dordrecht, The Netherlands. [CrossRef]
Bullo, F. , and Smith, S. L. , 2015, Lectures on Robotic Planning and Kinematics, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
Yan, Z. , Jouandeau, N. , and Cherif, A. , 2013, “A Survey and Analysis of Multi-Robot Coordination,” Int. J. Adv. Rob. Syst., 10(399), pp. 1–18.
Bullo, F. , Cortés, J. , and Martínez, S. , 2009, Distributed Control of Robotic Networks, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. [CrossRef]
Okabe, A. , Boots, B. , Sugihara, K. , and Chiu, S. N. , 2000, Spatial Tessellations: Concepts and Applications of Voronoi Diagrams (Series in Probability and Statistics), 2nd ed., Wiley, New York. [CrossRef]
Cortés, J. , Martínez, S. , Karatas, T. , and Bullo, F. , 2004, “Coverage Control for Mobile Sensing Networks,” IEEE Trans. Robot. Automat., 20(2), pp. 243–255.
Patel, R. , Frasca, P. , and Bullo, F. , 2014, “Centroidal Area-Constrained Partitioning for Robotic Networks,” ASME J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control, 136(3), p. 031024. [CrossRef]
Cortés, J. , 2010, “Coverage Optimization and Spatial Load Balancing by Robotic Sensor Networks,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 55(3), pp. 749–754. [CrossRef]
Fjällström, P. O. , 1998, “Algorithms for Graph Partitioning: A Survey,” Linköping Electron. Artic. Comput. Inf. Sci., 3(10), pp. 1–34.
Durham, J. W. , Carli, R. , Frasca, P. , and Bullo, F. , 2012, “Discrete Partitioning and Coverage Control for Gossiping Robots,” IEEE Trans. Rob., 28(2), pp. 364–378. [CrossRef]
Laporte, G. , 1992, “The Vehicle Routing Problem: An Overview of Exact and Approximate Algorithms,” Eur. J. Oper. Res., 59(3), pp. 345–358. [CrossRef]
Toth, P. , and Vigo, D. , eds., 2001, The Vehicle Routing Problem, (Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications), SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
Gutin, G. , and Punnen, A. P. , 2007, The Traveling Salesman Problem and Its Variations, Springer, New York. [CrossRef]
Ousingsawat, J. , and Earl, M. G. , 2007, “Modified Lawn-Mower Search Pattern for Areas Comprised of Weighted Regions,” American Control Conference (ACC), New York, July 9–13, pp. 918–923.
Soltero, D. E. , Schwager, M. , and Rus, D. , 2012, “Generating Informative Paths for Persistent Sensing in Unknown Environments,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Vilamoura, Portugal, Oct. 7–12, pp. 2172–2179.
Lan, X. , and Schwager, M. , 2013, “Planning Periodic Persistent Monitoring Trajectories for Sensing Robots in Gaussian Random Fields,” IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Karlsruhe, Germany, May 6–10, pp. 2415–2420.
Araujo, J. F. , Sujit, P. B. , and Sousa, J. B. , 2013, “Multiple UAV Area Decomposition and Coverage,” IEEE Symposium on Computational Intelligence for Security and Defense Applications (CISDA), Singapore, Apr. 16–19, pp. 30–37.
Nigam, N. , and Kroo, I. , 2008, “Persistent Surveillance Using Multiple Unmanned Air Vehicles,” IEEE Aerospace Conference (AERO), Big Sky, MT, Mar. 1–8.
Maza, I. , and Ollero, A. , 2007, “Multiple UAV Cooperative Searching Operation Using Polygon Area Decomposition and Efficient Coverage Algorithms,” Distributed Autonomous Robotic Systems, Vol. 6, R. Alami , R. Chatila , and H. Asama , eds., Springer, Tokyo, Japan, pp. 221–230. [CrossRef]
Wood, J. , and Hedrick, J. , 2012, “Partition Learning for Multiagent Planning,” J. Rob., 2012, p. 590479.
Bethke, B. , Valenti, M. , and How, J. P. , 2008, “UAV Task Assignment,” IEEE Rob. Autom. Mag., 15(1), pp. 39–44. [CrossRef]
Kehoe, B. , Patil, S. , Abbeel, P. , and Goldberg, K. , 2015, “A Survey of Research on Cloud Robotics and Automation,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng., 12(2), pp. 398–409. [CrossRef]
Hale, M. T. , and Egerstedt, M. , 2015, “Differentially Private Cloud-Based Multi-Agent Optimization With Constraints,” American Control Conference (ACC), Chicago, IL, July 1–3, pp. 1235–1240.
Adaldo, A. , Liuzza, D. , Dimarogonas, D. V. , and Johansson, K. H. , 2015, “Control of Multi-Agent Systems With Event-Triggered Cloud Access,” European Control Conference (ECC), Linz, Austria, July 15–17, pp. 954–961.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

When complete or pairwise coverage updates are impossible, two updates are required to move from the left-most to the right-most configuration. The left region is updated first, introducing a collision (redundant sensing) risk.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Illustration of the proposed strategy. The partitioning component (executed on the cloud) manages coverage regions and introduces logic to prevent collisions, while the trajectory planning component (executed on-board each agent) governs agent motion.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

A four-agent example mission over a static Gaussian likelihood. Each agent's position, past trajectory, and active coverage region are shown with the shaded triangle, line, and squares, respectively.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The maximum amount of time that any subregion went uncovered in each of the 50 simulation runs (left), and the value of the cost H as a function of time, averaged over the same 50 runs (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Comparison between the (time-invariant) event likelihood Φ (left), and the proportion of time that some agent occupied each subregion after significant time has passed (10,000 units) (right)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Simplified example illustrating how Algorithm 1 manipulates timing parameters to prevent agent collisions

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Comparison of coverage cost between Ref. [12] and Algorithm 1. Coverage costs are calculated with H min (see Ref. [12], Sec. II-C) on the left and with H (Sec. 4.2) on the right.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Coverage regions after the likelihood switches (see Fig. 9)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

The initial and final likelihood Φ(⋅, t)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Evolution of the cost H using a piecewise-constant likelihood with 12 random switches (indicated by the stars) (left), and the average percent decrease in H following each switch (right)




Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In