Researcher profile

Frank Veenstra

Frank Veenstra contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Centralized and Decentralized Control in Modular Robots and Their Effect on Morphology

In Evolutionary Robotics, evolutionary algorithms are used to co-optimize morphology and control. However, co-optimizing leads to different challenges: How do you optimize a controller for a body that often changes its number of inputs and outputs? Researchers must then make some choice between centralized or decentralized control. In this article, we study the effects of centralized and decentralized controllers on modular robot performance and morphologies. This is done by implementing one centralized and two decentralized continuous time recurrent neural network controllers, as well as a sine wave controller for a baseline. We found that a decentralized approach that was more independent of morphology size performed significantly better than the other approaches. It also worked well in a larger variety of morphology sizes. In addition, we highlighted the difficulties of implementing centralized control for a changing morphology, and saw that our centralized controller struggled more with early convergence than the other approaches. Our findings indicate that duplicated decentralized networks are beneficial when evolving both the morphology and control of modular robots. Overall, if these findings translate to other robot systems, our results and issues encountered can help future researchers make a choice of control method when co-optimizing morphology and control.

preprint2020arXiv

Quality and Diversity in Evolutionary Modular Robotics

In Evolutionary Robotics a population of solutions is evolved to optimize robots that solve a given task. However, in traditional Evolutionary Algorithms, the population of solutions tends to converge to local optima when the problem is complex or the search space is large, a problem known as premature convergence. Quality Diversity algorithms try to overcome premature convergence by introducing additional measures that reward solutions for being different while not necessarily performing better. In this paper we compare a single objective Evolutionary Algorithm with two diversity promoting search algorithms; a Multi-Objective Evolutionary Algorithm and MAP-Elites a Quality Diversity algorithm, for the difficult problem of evolving control and morphology in modular robotics. We compare their ability to produce high performing solutions, in addition to analyze the evolved morphological diversity. The results show that all three search algorithms are capable of evolving high performing individuals. However, the Quality Diversity algorithm is better adept at filling all niches with high-performing solutions. This confirms that Quality Diversity algorithms are well suited for evolving modular robots and can be an important means of generating repertoires of high performing solutions that can be exploited both at design- and runtime.