See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/344180532

Review on state-of-the-art dynamic task allocation strategies for multiple-

robot systems

Article in Industrial Robot the international journal of robotics research and application · September 2020
DOI: 10.1108/IR-04-2020-0073

CITATIONS READS

50 3,039

4 authors:

Seenu Saravanan Kuppan Chetty Ramanathan

Hindustan University Hindustan University
9 PUBLICATIONS 69 CITATIONS 75 PUBLICATIONS 303 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Ramya MM Mukund Nilakantan Janardhanan

Hindustan University University of Leicester
55 PUBLICATIONS 322 CITATIONS 82 PUBLICATIONS 1,429 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Kuppan Chetty Ramanathan on 20 October 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Review on state-of-the-art dynamic task
allocation strategies for
multiple-robot systems
Seenu N., Kuppan Chetty R.M. and Ramya M.M.
Centre for Automation and Robotics, School of Mechanical Sciences, Hindustan Institute of Technology and Science, Chennai, India, and
Mukund Nilakantan Janardhanan
School of Engineering, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK

Abstract
Purpose – This paper aims to present a concise review on the variant state-of-the-art dynamic task allocation strategies. It presents a thorough
discussion about the existing dynamic task allocation strategies mainly with respect to the problem application, constraints, objective functions and
uncertainty handling methods.
Design/methodology/approach – This paper briefs the introduction of multi-robot dynamic task allocation problem and discloses the challenges
that exist in real-world dynamic task allocation problems. Numerous task allocation strategies are discussed in this paper, and it establishes the
characteristics features between them in a qualitative manner. This paper also exhibits the existing research gaps and conducive future research
directions in dynamic task allocation for multiple mobile robot systems.
Findings – This paper concerns the objective functions, robustness, task allocation time, completion time, and task reallocation feature for
performance analysis of different task allocation strategies. It prescribes suitable real-world applications for variant task allocation strategies and
identifies the challenges to be resolved in multi-robot task allocation strategies.
Originality/value – This paper provides a comprehensive review of dynamic task allocation strategies and incites the salient research directions to
the researchers in multi-robot dynamic task allocation problems. This paper aims to summarize the latest approaches in the application of
exploration problems.
Keywords Multiple mobile robots, Dynamic task allocation, Market-based task allocation, Behavior-based task allocation, Task clustering,
Heuristic task allocation
Paper type General review

1. Introduction and Nair, 2017) agriculture, exploration of underwater, space

and land, search and rescue operations (Rishwaraj and
A cooperative multiple-robot system is one of the most
Ponnambalam, 2017).
extensive research domains in robotics (Fang et al., 2018;
In the paradigm of the multi-robot system, there are two
Palmer et al., 2018). A multiple-robot system (MRS) deploys a
coordination methodologies: centralized and distributed
number of cooperative robots in a coordinated fashion to
(Johnson et al., 2016; Semwal et al., 2017). In centralized
execute and accomplish tasks (D’Emidio and Khan, 2017).
coordination, a server monitors the essential parameters such as
Deployment of a single robot to perform such complicated
relative position, status of the task, battery capacity of
tasks is time-consuming and exhausting (Li and Li, 2017).
Whereas, deployment of multiple robots overwhelms the individual robots in the team. The server also identifies the
drawbacks of a single-robot system, are sufficient to perform most competent robot to execute a task. This system relies on a
complex tasks faster than a single robot in a distributed central server for successful task allocation; however, it
manner. It provides the flexibility to manipulate the robots becomes futile when the central server fails (Li et al., 2017a).
failure, self-reconfiguration, high fault tolerance and robustness Therefore, this coordination is befitting to a small team of
(Palmer et al., 2018). The applications of an MRS are in robots with rigidly connected networks (Liu et al., 2017). In
numerous fields such as manufacturing, construction, mining, distributed coordination, individual robots allocate their own
inspection (Liu et al., 2017), warehouses (Tsang et al., 2018), tasks. It requires neither a globally connected network nor a
surveillance (Farinelli et al., 2017), defence applications (Jha central server (Hooshangi and Alesheikh, 2017). Every
individual robot frequently observes the status of the neighbour
robots within its field of view (Sung et al., 2018). It compares its
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald task execution competency from its neighbours’ competency
Insight at: https://www.emerald.com/insight/0143-991X.htm and self-allocates profitable tasks (Lerman et al., 2006;

Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application

Received 9 April 2020
47/6 (2020) 929–942 Revised 9 July 2020
© Emerald Publishing Limited [ISSN 0143-991X] 18 August 2020
[DOI 10.1108/IR-04-2020-0073] Accepted 19 August 2020

929
 Task allocation strategies Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
Seenu N. et al. Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942

Luo et al., 2014). This method is suitable for a large team of study reviewed published articles from 2010–2020, from high-
robots in weak communication environments (Wang et al., ranking journals and reputable international conferences, most
2018). Though the centralized coordination method of which were related to multiple-robot task allocation, swarm
necessitates a rigid communication network, it ensures the robots, scheduling and optimization methods and were
consensus about task allocation among the team of robots. extracted from the “Web of Science and Scopus” databases.
Whereas, distributed coordination is unsusceptible to frail The performance of various strategies is compared considering
communication, but the consensus of task allocation is difficult the holistic nature of the problem and parameters such as
to achieve (Giordani et al., 2010). The responsibilities of number of robots, tasks, time for task allocation and
individual robots in MRS networks are task execution and completion, uncertainty conditions and several other
coordination (Irfan and Farooq, 2016; Xie et al., 2018). The constraints.
coordination methods have their own advantages and This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 defines the
disadvantages. Thus, the proper selection of a coordination multiple-robot dynamic task allocation problem. Section 3
method for an application influences successful task allocation presents a detailed analysis of four distinct task allocation
and task accomplishment in an MRS. strategies. Section 4 provides a detailed discussion of the
Multi-robot task allocation (MRTA) problems are analyzed literature, and Section 5 presents the possible research
categorized into eight types, as shown in Figure 1 (Gerkey and gaps and scope in this area. Section 6 concludes the major
Matari
c 2004). Korsah et al. (2013) group them into four findings in this paper.
(Figure 2) based on inter-dependent resources and constraints
and refer them as iTax classification. The task allocation
strategies are classified with respect to the consequential
2. Multi-robot task allocation problem definition
applications such as search and rescue, surveillance, foraging, This section outlines the MRTA problem. Let J = {j1, j2, j3. . .jm}
flocking, formation, target tracking, cooperative manipulation be the set of tasks to be allocated, and R = {r1,r2,r3. . .rn} be the set
and exploration (Jia and Meng, 2013; Darmanin and Bugeja, of robots in the team. The term A in equation (1) represents that
2017; Jin et al., 2019). Two important task allocation strategies the set of tasks J are assigned to the set of robots R:
are auction- and optimization-based techniques (Badreldin
et al., 2013; Khamis et al., 2015). The evaluation of these task A:J!R (1)
allocation strategies based on the solution optimality, allocation
time and problem constraints determine that optimization- If a task j is allocated to a robot r, then task allocation Aj,r = 1
based task allocation is faster and produces optimal solutions else Aj,r = 0.
for complex constrained problems. Let UJ [ R be a matrix of required utility values to execute m
In recent years, the researchers have focused on developing tasks by n robots.
dynamic task allocation strategies for complex constraint Let UR [ R be a matrix of available utility values to execute m
problems and developing robust strategies with multiple tasks by n robots.
uncertainty conditions. This paper aims to survey the Let T = {T1, T2, T3, . . .Tm} be the start time of m tasks.
contemporary dynamic task allocation strategies (Nunes et al., Let W = {W1, W2, W3, . . .Wm} be the waiting time of the
2017). It recognizes the expedient task allocation strategies for tasks to commence.
variant real-world MRS applications. It performs a review of Let M = {M1, M2, M3, . . .Mm} be the set of time span of the
task allocation strategies by analyzing the problem applications, tasks.
constraints, objective functions, task allocation and completion Let Dj,r be the distance travelled by the robot r to execute the
time and the uncertainty handling methods. In this paper, the task j.
authors have attempted to review, categorize and evaluate the Let K = {K1, K2. . .Kl} be the set of completed tasks.
related papers to provide a systematic view of past work and Task assignment to the robots is an optimal decision-making
provide various research scopes in this problem domain. This problem. It is subject to some essential constraints. The various

Figure 1 Fundamental MRTA taxonomy

Figure 2 iTax MRTA taxonomy

930
 Task allocation strategies Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
Seenu N. et al. Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942

Table 1 Dynamic task allocation constraints with examples

Constraints Types
Environmental constraints Moving obstacles, unknown environment, cluttered environment, etc.
Robot constraints Sensor malfunction, communication loss, uncertainty of robot’s travel distance, heterogeneity draining of battery capacity,
computational capacity, resource constraint (Chen and Sun, 2011; Notomista et al., 2019; Schillinger et al., 2019)
Task constraints Time-bounded tasks, multi-agent tasks, hierarchical tasks (Blankenburg et al., 2017), task variants (Cano et al., 2018)

multi-robot problem constraints are listed in Table 1. The basic reviewed and will be discussed in detail in the remaining
dynamic task allocation problem consists of resource and time sections of the paper.
constraints as stated below:
 A task must be allocated to a robot with sufficient utility, 3. Dynamic task allocation strategies
as depicted in equation (2):
The objective of multi-robot dynamic task allocation problems
If Uj > Ur then Ajr ¼ 0; 8j 2 J and r 2 R (2) is mapping of the tasks with the robots by satisfying the
constraints such a way that the cost function is minimal (Sarkar
 The task execution time T of the tasks allocated to a robot
et al., 2018a). The prominent part of real-world multi-robot
must not overlap with each other. Equation (3) depicts
applications is that the constraints are irregular and diverse in
this constraint. It includes starting time, waiting time and
nature. Hence, a rational task allocation strategy necessitates
time span of the tasks:

 robust handling of the distinct constraints occurs at the time of
Tjp  Tjq 1 Wjq 1 Mjq where; jp and jq e J and jp jq ; task execution. There are various task allocation methods
reported in the literature, and Figure 3 shows the four broad
the task jp must be scheduled after the task jq (3)
classifications of multi-robot dynamic task allocation strategies.
 The task assignment must be conflict-free. Equation This section discusses the task allocation strategies in detail.
(4) specifies that a task must be allocated to a single In this study, the concepts of numerous MRTA strategies
robot: form the literature are discussed. The discussion is based on the
problem application, the objective function, additional
X
Tj;r ¼ 1 8j 2 J (4) constraints involved, coordination type, the problem
r2R
taxonomy, task reallocation feature, uncertainty handling
The most common objective functions (equation (5)–(7)) of method. In addition to these points, the number of tasks and
dynamic task allocation strategy are: minimize the travel robots considered in the implementation stage, the resultant
distance (d), the waiting time (W) and to maximize the task average task allocation time, task completion time and the
completion rate (K): implementation method, either simulation or real
X X experimentation, are considered. This way of analysis helps the
min : j2J
D
r2R j;r
(5) reader to identify the suitable strategy to be considered for the
problem scenario.
X
min j2J
Wj (6)
3.1 Market-based task allocation
X Market-based task allocation is a prominent multiple-robot
max : l2J
jKl j lm (7) task allocation strategy (Schneider et al., 2017). It imitates the
market trading concept (Luo et al., 2015). The process of
This multi-robot dynamic task allocation problem is a market-based task allocation strategy is illustrated in Figure 4.
combinatorial optimization problem. In this paper, the existing An auctioneer robot advertises tasks information to other
strategies for solving this problem are comprehensively robots in the team and requests for bids. Every individual robot

Figure 3 Classification of dynamic task allocation strategies

Figure 4 Process of market-based task allocation

931
 Task allocation strategies Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
Seenu N. et al. Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942

in the team prepares bid based on its capability to execute the The essential objective functions of dynamic task allocation
tasks and then forwards the bids to the auctioneer robot. The problems are minimization of: task completion time, robot
auctioneer robot allocates the tasks to the least quoted robots. travel distance, battery resource utilization; maximization of:
This strategy is implemented in both centralized and task distribution rate and task completion rate. Table 3 lists the
distributed robot’s coordination network (Schneider et al., features of various optimization strategies. Similar to market-
2017). based strategy, most of the optimization strategies consider
Market-based task allocation is broadly divided into single- single-objective optimization only. Several methods have been
item auctioning and combinatorial auctioning. The single-item used in the literature for this. Few researchers considered
auctioning (Otte et al., 2020) method conducts task-wise integer programming (Li and Li, 2017; Su et al., 2018; Zhou
auctions. Whereas, combinatorial auctioning conducts et al., 2019) and various search algorithms (Zhao et al., 2015;
auctions for a group of tasks. Researchers develop multiple Kartal et al., 2016; Mitiche et al., 2019). Many researchers used
variants of these two methods. Table 2 illustrates a detailed metaheuristic algorithms (Liu and Kroll, 2012; Alshawi and
discussion of various market-based task allocation strategies Shalan, 2017; Li et al., 2017b, Z. Zhu et al., 2017; Arif and
from the literature. To handle uncertainty, the task allocation Haider, 2018; Chen et al., 2018b, Padmanabhan Panchu et al.,
list and cost estimate are periodically updated. With respect to 2018; Wang et al., 2018; Zhou et al., 2019) to solve this
the updated cost estimate, the tasks are reallocated (Turner optimization problem, and this could be because of the ease of
et al., 2017; Turner, 2018). Search and rescue tasks incorporate implementation of such algorithms.
several uncertainties such as risk level of the victims, cluttered Generation of multiple solutions for a problem instance
path and robot energy level (Talebpour and Martinoli, 2018). enhances the robustness of single-objective optimization
The interval uncertainty theory handles these uncertainties. It (Huang et al., 2018). Though this technique theoretically
updates the bid estimates within a periodical interval and enhances the robustness, there is a gap for systematic switching
reallocates the tasks. This approach improves the task between multiple solutions. An optimization strategy consumes
completion rate and increases the number of life-saved victims high computational resources (Shenoy and Anupama, 2017).
Multi-objective optimization approach improves the task
in search and rescue applications (Hooshangi and Alesheikh,
completion rate with less time utility. The issue in multi-
2017). However, task reallocation handles uncertainty and
objective optimization is framing the proper fitness function. As
improves robustness, task switching increases computation
some of the objective factors of dynamic task allocation have a
time and it indirectly increases the robot energy consumption
functional trade-off, the weight value of each objective factor
(Talebpour and Martinoli, 2018). The procedural process of
must be precisely given. In future, it is recommended to
auctioning consumes much time. In common, all the market-
perform a study on regularity and adoption of fitness factors for
based task allocation strategies result in less robot travel
distinct task allocation problems.
distance. The market-based task allocation strategies rely on
The task distribution rate of multi-objective optimization is
strongly connected robots’ networks. The task completion rate
higher than the single-objective optimization strategy. This
of market-based strategies during communication loss or weak
approach has better scalability. However, the robustness is low
communication environments is poor. because of the poor adaptability to multiple performance
The variants of single-item auctioning and combinatorial objective factors. However, there is an open research gap to
auctioning are found in the literature. It supports all kinds of identify differences between the simulation and real
coordination. Most of the authors used single-objective implementation of optimization-based dynamic task allocation.
functions, and it is observed that task allocation strategies are
implemented in simulation than in real experiments as can be 3.3 Behaviour-based task allocation
seen (S shows simulation, R shows real-time experiments). Behaviour-based dynamic task allocation is a unique strategy.
There exists a large gap to identify the difference between the This strategy exerts multiple prorated solutions to solve distinct
simulation results and the real-time execution results. problem instances taking place in a single application. The
problem solutions are in any form of mathematical model,
3.2 Optimization-based task allocation heuristic or optimization functions. This strategy is highly
Real-world multiple robot problems are bounded with multiple reactive to the problem. Multi-robot exploration problems
uncertain constraints. Therefore, the mathematical modelling consist of two-layered behaviour-based control architecture
of dynamic task allocation problems is formidable (Li and (Chetty et al., 2010; Chetty et al., 2011). Tasks identification
Yang, 2018). However, heuristic modelling of dynamic task and inter robot communication are classified under higher-level
allocation problems furnishes contiguous optimal solutions. behaviours, whereas obstacle avoidance, navigation and task
The multiple mobile robots’ dynamic task allocation problem is switching are categorized into lower-level behaviours. In
generalized as multiple travelling salesman problem (Arif and addition to the basic low-level behaviours, problem-specific
Haider, 2017) and classified as a combinatorial optimization behaviours are developed to incorporate robustness
problem (dos Reis and Bastos, 2017). It is solved by (Schillinger et al., 2018).
evolutionary optimization algorithms: genetic algorithm (Arif Table 4 summarizes the analysis of various behaviour-based
and Haider, 2017; Arif and Haider, 2018; Bänziger et al., task allocation techniques. Unlike other task allocation
2018), particle swarm optimization (PSO) (Alshawi and strategies, this approach is adaptable and reactive to the
Shalan, 2017), ant colony optimization (ACO) (Li et al., problem’s specific constraints. Thus, this strategy leads to high
2017b), the variants of PSO and ACO algorithms (Muhuri and robustness and scalability features. This approach is adaptable
Rauniyar, 2017). for centralized and distributed coordination. Distributed

932
 Table 2 Analysis of market-based task allocation
Seenu N. et al.

Additional Problem Maximum Maximum Average task Average task Real time/
Source Application Method Objective function constraint type Coordination Reallocation Uncertainty no.: tasks no.: robots allocation time (s) completion time simulation
Task allocation strategies

Chen and Sun (2011) Generic Leader–follower Maximize utility Heterogeneous team ST-SR-IA Distributed Y N 5 3 – – S
coalition algorithm with resource
constraint
Luo et al. (2012) Generic Repeated greedy auction Maximize total payoff Task group ST-SR-TA Distributed N N 60 20 – – S
algorithm
Liu and Shell (2012) Generic Optimal auctioning with Minimize distance travelled – ST-SR-IA Distributed Y N 500 500 0.5 – S
strategic pricing
Tolmidis and Petrou Generic Hybrid genetic algorithm Maximize robot battery Remaining energy ST-SR-IA Distributed Y N 10 6 5.62 – S
(2013) (GA) distributed auction energy and relevance has to be above a
degree, minimize time predefined level
Liekna et al. (2012) Multiple vacuum Contract Net protocol Minimize the effort – SR-MT-IA Centralized Y N 2 2 – – S

933
cleaning robots required for cleaning an
area
Liu and Shell (2013) Generic Linear integer Maximize profit – ST-SR-IA Distributed N N 100 100 – – S
programming with
partitioning of tasks
Luo et al. (2015) Generic Iterative auctioning Maximize remaining Task deadline ST-SR-TA Distributed N N 100 20 – – S
battery power
Wei et al. (2016) Search and retrieval SSI. Extend SSI Minimize the completion Temporal constraint ST-SR-IA Centralized/ N N 30 10 – 150.57 (s) S
time and fuel consumption distributed
Farinelli et al. (2017) Multi-robot patrolling SSI auctions Maximize the number of – ST-SR-IA Distributed N Y 8 3 – – R
visits
Hooshangi and Search and rescue Contract Net protocol Maximize the number of Heterogeneous team ST-SR-IA Distributed Y Y 2000 200 – 738 (min) S
Alesheikh (2017) rescued victims
Otte et al. (2020) Lossy communication Comparison of six Minimize the maximum Communication ST-SR-IA Distributed N N 1000 300 – – S
environment auction algorithms path length limited environments
Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942
Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
 Table 3 Analysis of optimization-based task allocation

Additional Problem Maximum Maximum Average task Average task Real time/
Source Application Method Objective function constraint type Coordination Reallocation Uncertainty no.: tasks no.: robots allocation time (s) completion time (s) simulation

Wawerla and Vaughan Puck transportation Centralized planner and Minimize robot energy – ST-SR-IA Centralized/ Y N 2 18 – – S
(2010) heuristic rules consumption distributed
Seenu N. et al.

Jevtic et al. (2011) Generic Distributed bee colony Maximize task distribution – ST-SR-IA Distributed N N 4 100 – – S
optimization
Task allocation strategies

Liu and Kroll (2012) Industrial plant A and GAs Maximize task completion – ST-SR-IA Centralized N N 90 3 170.48 – S
inspection
Wang et al. (2012) Generic ACO Minimize travel distance Resource constraints ST-SR-IA Distributed N N – – – – S
Giordani et al. (2013) Industry production Iterative auction-based Minimize production cost – ST-SR-IA Distributed Y N 50 250 – – S
negotiation
Zhao et al. (2015) Search and rescue Heuristic based Minimize sum of path cost Limited resources MT-MR-IA Distributed Y N 32 16 – 238.49 S
Kartal et al. (2016) Generic Monte Carlo tree search Minimize travel distance ST-SR-TA Centralized N N – S
Arif and Haider (2017) Generic GA Minimize travel distance – ST-SR-IA Centralized N N 30 3 – 41.54 S
Alshawi and Shalan Foraging PSO Minimize time – ST-SR-IA Distributed N N 10 7 14.6 – S
(2017)
Z. Zhu et al. (2017) Generic Improved PSO Maximize benefit with Payload constraint ST-SR-IA Distributed N N 40 6 5208 – S

934
minimum travelling
distance and paid cost
Li and Li (2017) Warehouse Integer programming Minimize the sum of the – ST-SR-IA Centralized Y N 10 10 – S
automation and GA fixed cost of robot and the
cost of robot operation
Li et al. (2017b) Generic ACO Minimize travel distance – ST-SR-IA Distributed N N 10 – – – S
Tsang et al. (2018) Warehouse GA Minimize travel distance – MT-MR-IA Centralized N N 100 100 0.340 – S
automation
Turner et al. (2017) Search and Rescue PI-MaxAss Maximize the number of Time and fuel limit ST-SR-TA Distributed Y N – – – – S
task allocations
Chen et al. (2018a) Generic PSO multi-objective Maximize time utility and – ST-SR-IA Distributed N N 16 16 – – S
energy utility
Mitiche et al. (2019) Generic Iterated local search Maximize the number of Spatio-temporal and ST-SR-TA Distributed N N  – – – S
tasks capacity
Zhou et al. (2019) Generic Integer programming Minimize task completion – ST-SR-IA Centralized N N – – – – S
and approximation tree- time
based GA
Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942
Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
 Table 4 Analysis of behaviour-based task allocation

Average task Average task

Seenu N. et al.

Problem Maximum no.: Maximum allocation time completion Real time/

Source Application Method Behaviour Objective function Additional constraint type Coordination Reallocation Uncertainty tasks no.: robots (s) time (s) simulation
Task allocation strategies

Chen and Sun (2012) Generic Sequential coalition Coalition Maximize coalition utility Resource constraint MR-ST-IA Distributed N – 6 10 – – R
method
Lee et al. (2014) Foraging Iterative search on ad Resource aware cost Minimize resource Limited resources ST-SR-IA Distributed Y  100 16 – 64.9 S
hoc network generation consumption
Kanakia et al. (2016) Generic Game theory Bayesian Continuous response Maximize task completion No communication ST-SR-IA Distributed N Communication – – – – S
Nash equilibrium threshold
Riccio et al. (2016) Soccer game/foraging Distributed world Context knowledge Minimize time – ST-SR-IA Distributed N – 1 3 – – R
modelling and task based
allocation
Abukhalil et al. (2016) Search and Rescue Robot utility-based task Robot utility-based Maximize utility Heterogeneous team ST-MR-IA Centralized/ Y – 5 1 – 110.3 R
assignment allocation distributed
Lee and Kim (2017) Foraging Task selection probability Response threshold Maximize task distribution No communication ST-SR-IA Distributed Y 50 20 S

935
– – –
model behaviour
Wu et al. (2017) Generic Gini coefficient and Gini coefficient-based Minimize resource Limited energy resources ST-SR-IA Centralized N Resource 50 5 – – S
auction-based allocation allocation consumption constraint
Lee (2018) Goods delivery mission Probabilistic bid Resource-based task Minimize the maximum cost Fuel refill station ST-SR-IA Distributed Y Resource-level 72 11 – – S
auctioning allocation and time uncertainty
Talebpour and Martinoli Pedestrian walking Adaptive risk-based re- Risk-based allocation Minimize travel distance Social constraints ST-SR-IA Distributed Y Human walking 5 4 – – R
(2018) planning strategy
Dai et al. (2019) Soccer game Incomplete information Ball velocity-based Minimize the payoff No communication ST-SR-IA Distributed N – – 3 – – R
game modelling allocation
Jin et al. (2019) Target tracking Competition-based task Besieging behaviour- Maximize task completion Limited communication ST-MR-IA Distributed N – – – – – S
allocation based allocation
Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942
Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
 Task allocation strategies Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
Seenu N. et al. Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942

coordination requires local communication rather than global eliminating the requirement for the prior tasks list. Under
communication between robots for task allocation. Therefore, uncertain conditions, it is plausible to lose communication
this strategy is suitable for weak communication applications. within the robot’s team. From survey, it is found that a robust
Task switching or swapping behaviour is incorporated with the and reliable communication network is mandatory for the
task allocation model. Thus, this strategy could handle a market-based task allocation leading to an open challenge that
robot’s failure that occurred during the task execution phase is not yet been solved. Relying on a single-point auctioneer for
(Zhao et al., 2015). The resource-based task allocation task allocation is the major downside of this strategy.
behaviour provides an improved task distribution rate (Lee and Development of a systematic strategy to handle this single-
Kim, 2019). Therefore, behaviour-based task allocation is point failure is a further potential research direction in market-
recommended for task allocation in uncertain and dynamic based task allocation. Various optimization algorithms based
real-world multiple mobile robot (MMR) applications. on dynamic task allocation strategies are reported in the
literature. Task allocation quality relies on the fitness function
3.4 Clustered task allocation used in the optimization algorithms. Overall, the optimization-
Clustered task allocation strategies group the similar or nearby based task allocations provide less robustness. Thus,
tasks into clusters, and then the clusters are allocated to robots determination of self-adaptive fitness function to successfully
rather than single task allocation. This strategy decreases the handle uncertainties is yet to be considered by the researchers.
average travel distance of the robot team (Chen et al., 2018b). The analysis of the literature states that multi-objective
For search and rescue applications, nearby tasks are clustered. optimization techniques outperform single-objective dynamic
Similarly, for warehouse operations, nearby tasks clustering is task allocation. However, there exists a huge research gap in
implemented. According to Sarkar et al. (2018b), as the robots deriving multi-objective cost function with the trading-off
execute the nearby tasks, the overall travel distance and the objective factors. Several heuristic algorithms are available;
resource utilization are less. Similar types of tasks are clustered thus, further research is recommended for identification and
for heterogeneous robots’ teams, and the consent task type is validation of optimal heuristic technique for specific multi-
allocated to the corresponding type of robots. For the clustering robot problems. Implementation and performance comparison
of tasks, methods such as Euclidean distance clustering, K of various optimization algorithms is another research direction
means clustering, fuzzy clustering (Ghassemi and Chowdhury, that could be performed.
2018) are reported to be used in the literature. The uniqueness of behaviour-based task allocation strategy
The critical challenge in clustering-based task allocation is makes it flexible to incorporate reactive behaviours of robots for
the identification of the optimal number of tasks per cluster various problem constraints and uncertainties. This feature
(Nam and Shell, 2016). The determination of optimal number increases the robustness and scalability of task allocation.
of tasks for a cluster is empirically studied in Mitiche et al. Arbitration among multiple behaviours is the challenging
(2019). The performance analysis of clustering-based task aspect of this strategy. This strategy consumes more
allocation approaches is given in Table 5. A task clustering computation resources, which is another drawback. However,
strategy minimizes the travel distance; thus, it is recommended this strategy is recommended for applications with various
for foraging applications. Clustered task allocation reduces the uncertainties.
number of individual tasks to be allocated. Therefore, Task clustering-based allocation strategy consumes minimal
computational complexity is drastically reduced in this travel distance for the robots. This strategy is suitable for
approach. This strategy is adaptable with centralized autonomous multi-robot surveillance applications.
coordination. Thus, it is not relevant for weak communication Identification of an optimal number of tasks in a cluster is the
applications. As a group of tasks is assigned to a robot, the research problem open for further study. Simultaneous task
occurrence of a robot’s failure will decrease the task completion allocation and path planning strategy increase the task
rate drastically. This downside is solved by task switching/ completion rate (Sung et al., 2018). Development of effective
swapping with the next available robots in case of robot failure switching strategies between clusters to handle uncertainty like
conditions. robot failures is the further research direction in this strategy.
Similarly, integrating the different task allocation strategies like
4. Discussion behaviour-based allocation with task clustering-based task
allocation strategy is also a significant research direction for the
This paper presents a detailed review of the state-of-the-art future. Table 6 illustrates the performance factors for MRTA
MMR dynamic task allocation strategies. Even though every problems. The ways of adapting to these factors by the four task
task allocation technique in the literature has been analyzed and allocation strategies are presented in detail.
validated by simulations, it lacks validation through real-time
experimentation. Identification of the gaps between simulation
and experimental results is still open research in the field of
5. Gaps and future research scope
dynamic task allocation (Jang et al., 2018). In market-based From the literature review analysis, it is identified that a
task allocation, robots have the provision to opt for profitable multiple-robot system with different depot points for each
tasks. This method results in the optimal selection of robot decreases the total travel distance and inter-robot
subsequent tasks. Conventionally, sequential single-item (SSI) collisions (Lu et al., 2018). Task allocation for complex
and parallel auctioning require a prior list of tasks. Repeated constraint problems, including time window tasks (Liu et al.,
auctioning is preferred for dynamic task allocation problems 2017), hierarchical tasks (Blankenburg et al., 2017), robot
because it updates tasks in a dynamic manner, in turn dependent tasks, task unknown problems, is still open for

936
 Table 5 Analysis of clustered task allocation

Average task Average task

Additional Problem Maximum Maximum allocation completion Real time/
Source Application Method Objective function constraint type Coordination Reallocation Uncertainty no.: tasks no.: robots time (s) time (s) simulation
Seenu N. et al.

Zhang et al. (2012) Generic Stochastic clustering Minimize time – MT-SR-IA Centralized/ N N – 6 – – S
Task allocation strategies

auction, constrained distributed

Prim’s algorithm
Faigl et al. (2012) Exploration Multiple travelling Minimize travel distance – MT-SR-IA Distributed N N – 10 – – S
salesmen-based
assignment; K-means
clustering
Biswas et al. (2017) Generic PSO with k-means Minimize travel distance – MT-SR-TA Distributed N N 10 3 – – S
clustering
Chen et al. (2018b) Search and rescue Cluster first consensus- Maximize the no.: of – MT-SR-IA Distributed N N 2 14 – – S
based strategy rescued survivors,
minimize the waiting
time of survivors, the

937
total travelling distance
of robots
Lu et al. (2018) Foraging Central place foraging Minimize travel distance – MT-MR-IA Distributed N N 384 24 – – S
algorithm, k-means
clustering
Sarkar et al. (2018b) Warehouse Nearest neighbour-based Minimize travel distance Robot capacity MT-SR-IA Distributed N N – – – – S
clustering and routing constraint
Ghassemi and Generic Fuzzy clustering, bipartite Minimize travel distance – MT-SR-IA Distributed N N 100 50 4.63 S
Chowdhury (2018) graph matching
Whitbrook et al. Generic Robust performance Minimize mean – MT-SR-IA Distributed N Y 32 16 S
(2019) impact algorithm individual task cost
Dutta et al. (2019) Generic Linear programming- Maximize coalition – MT-MR-IA Centralized N N 10 100 230 – S
based graph partitioning structure, after
minimizing the cost of
forming it
Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942
Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
 Task allocation strategies Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
Seenu N. et al. Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942

Table 6 Factors for MRTA problems

Optimization-based Task clustering-based
Performance factors Market-based allocation allocation Behaviour-based allocation allocation
No communication/lossy Multiple times broadcasting of Local communication among Local communication among Local communication among
communication winner robot details after neighbour robots neighbour robots neighbour robots
bidding
Objective function Single/multiple objective Single/multiple objective Single/multiple objective Single/multiple objective
Coordination type Centralized/distributed Centralized/distributed Centralized/distributed Centralized/distributed
Method for task Iterative auctioning methods Iterative searching and Heuristics rules searching/ Difficult reallocate within
reallocation allocation Bayesian Nash equilibrium different task clusters
Uncertainty handling Iterative auctioning methods Difficult to handle Game theory/probabilistic Difficult to handle uncertainty
techniques uncertainties predictive modelling
Complex problem Difficult to conduct auctions Complex and difficult to solve Can be handled in a collective Can be handled in a collective
constraints due to multiple decision manner manner
variables
Computational cost Lower than optimization Higher than market-based Higher than optimization- Lower than other methods
strategy strategy based strategy

research (Khamis et al., 2015). Development of soft agents for strategy is applicable to this problem because strong
robust task allocation is also a further research direction that communication may not exist in all the disaster fields.
can be explored (Ismail and Sariff, 2018). Development of the Incorporating task switching and reallocation mechanisms in
game theoretical approach for distributed task allocation for case of robot failures and other uncertainties improves the
communication loss problems is recommended for further robustness of task allocation (Chen et al., 2016; Woosley and
research analysis (Dai et al., 2019). A very few researchers Dasgupta, 2018). Another challenge in this problem is the
identified dynamic task allocation strategies by applying some proper dynamic task allocation and coordination between
modern approaches such as learning automata (Khani et al., heterogeneous mobile robots. Modelling the dynamic task
2019), deep learning, machine vision (Li and Yang, 2018), self- allocation problem in a three-dimensional environment is
organizing map neural networks (Zhu et al., 2017). efficacious to manipulate real-time application environment
Consider the following examples of MRTA problems, (Yi et al., 2016). In multi-robots gaming applications, the
dynamic task allocation for search and rescue of victims by unpredictable changes in the game environment are the
autonomous heterogeneous MMR in disaster field problem is a challenging aspect for task allocation. Similar to these
highly challenging problem for the researchers (Abukhalil et al., scenarios, every real-world multiple robot application places
2016). The list of search and rescue tasks to be performed is itself with distinct challenges and uncertainties for task
unknown in prior. Thus, the task allocation strategy for this allocation. The performance comparison of different task
problem must be scalable for tasks as well as robots during allocation strategies in real-time is a significant research
runtime. Rescue tasks must be given higher priority than the direction (Ismail and Sariff, 2018). In Table 7, various future
search tasks (Sung et al., 2018). Priority of the behaviour-based research scopes in MRTA problems are summarized for the
task allocation strategy ensures the execution of rescue tasks reader’s clarity.
prior to the search tasks. Integration of task clustering-based
allocation reduces the robot travel distance. This problem
6. Conclusion
contains an uncertain environment and obstacles. Thus, it is
recommended to develop a task allocation strategy that is This paper analyzed in detail several dynamic task allocation
reactive for the uncertain behaviours of obstacles (ElGibreen strategies developed and reported for multiple-robot
and Youcef-Toumi, 2019). The distributive task allocation systems. Even though many of the proposed strategies are

Table 7 Future research avenues in MRTA problems

 Development of task allocation strategies for tightly coupled tasks  Development of effective task rescheduling/reallocation mechanism
 Development of efficient failure handling mechanisms for all types of task  Development of task allocation within a heterogeneous team
allocation  Development of task allocation for unknown environment
 Development of hybrid task allocation strategies exploration problems
 Development of energy-aware task allocation strategies for recharging  Development of adaptive heuristic parameters for task allocation
robots to perform long-running tasks  Identification of ideal cluster size and procedure for task switching
 Evaluation of task priorities in task allocation among task clusters
 Unifying the performance evaluation metrics of task allocation strategies  Development of task allocation in no communication problem
 Development of task allocation for strict time-constraint problems environment
 Development of uncertainty handling task allocation techniques
 Real-time experimentation of task allocation problems

938
 Task allocation strategies Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
Seenu N. et al. Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942

validated using simulations study, very few strategies are Blankenburg, J., Banisetty, S.B., Alinodehi, S.P.H., Fraser, L.,
tested in real time. There exists a large gap between the Feil-Seifer, D., Nicolescu, M. and Nicolescu, M. (2017), “A
simulated and real-time multi-robot applications. Further distributed control architecture for collaborative multi-robot
research needs to be conducted exclusively to overcome the task allocation”, in: 2017 IEEE-RAS 17th International
experimental challenges of real-world applications. The Conference on Humanoid Robotics (Humanoids), IEEE.
multi-robot systems are prone to communication Cano, J., White, D.R., Bordallo, A., McCreesh, C., Michala,
uncertainty; thus, the current dynamic task allocation A.L., Singer, J. and Nagarajan, V. (2018), “Solving the task
techniques intend to be improved for achieving robustness variant allocation problem in distributed robotics”,
in weak or no communication scenarios. Robust task Autonomous Robots, Vol. 42 No. 7, pp. 1477-1495.
allocation with efficient task switching and swapping Chen, J. and Sun, D. (2011), “Resource constrained
techniques to manipulate the uncertainties is a needful multirobot task allocation based on leader–follower coalition
research direction in multi-robot systems. Multiple methodology”, The International Journal of Robotics Research,
behaviour-based dynamic task allocation techniques Vol. 30 No. 12, pp. 1423-1434.
improve the scalability and robustness. Another major Chen, J. and Sun, D. (2012), “Coalition-based approach to
challenge is the development of dynamic task allocation task allocation of multiple robots with resource constraints”,
strategies for exploration problems because an inadequate IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering,
number of studies have been reported on this problem. The Vol. 9 No. 3, pp. 516-528.
major challenge exists in the obscure knowledge of tasks to Chen, J., Wang, J., Xiao, Q. and Chen, C. (2018a), “A Multi-
be allocated in the unperceived application environment. Robot task allocation method based on Multi-Objective
The exploration problem entails task allocation in parallel optimization”, in: 2018 15th International Conference on
with the path planning of an unknown application Control, Automation, Robotics and Vision (ICARCV), IEEE.
environment. Hence, a successful exploration task Chen, X., Zhang, P., Li, F. and Du, G. (2018b), “A cluster first
allocation strategy is required to be scalable for tasks and to strategy for distributed multi-robot task allocation problem
be robust for environment uncertainties. Researchers can with time constraints”, in: 2018 WRC Symposium on
also develop integrated and robust behaviour-based Advanced Robotics and Automation (WRC SARA), IEEE.
dynamic task allocation strategies for search and rescue Chen, Y., Mao, X., Hou, F., Wang, Q. and Yang, S. (2016),
applications as future work. “Combining re-allocating and re-scheduling for dynamic
multi-robot task allocation”, in: 2016 IEEE International
Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), IEEE.
References Chetty, R.K., Singaperumal, M. and Nagarajan, T. (2010),
Abukhalil, T., Patil, S. Patel, M. and Sobh, T. (2016), “Behaviour based planning and control of leader follower
“Coordinating a heterogeneous robot swarm using robot formations in wheeled mobile robots”, International Journal
utility-based task assignment (RUTA)”, in: 2016 IEEE 14th of Advanced Mechatronic Systems, Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 281-296.
International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control (AMC), Chetty, R.K., Singaperumal, M., Nagarajan, T. and Tetsunari,
IEEE. I. (2011), “Coordination control of wheeled mobile robots?
Alshawi, M.A. and Shalan, M.B. (2017), “Minimal time A hybrid approach”, International Journal of Computer
dynamic task allocation for a swarm of robots”, International Applications in Technology, Vol. 41 Nos 3/4, pp. 195-204.
Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Robotics Research, Dai, W., Lu, H., Xiao, J. and Zheng, Z. (2019), “Task
Vol. 6 No. 6. allocation without communication based on incomplete
Arif, M.U. and Haider, S. (2017), “An evolutionary traveling information game theory for multi-robot systems”, Journal of
salesman approach for Multi-Robot task allocation”, in: Intelligent & Robotic Systems, Vol. 94 Nos 3/4, pp. 841-856.
Icaart (2). Darmanin, R.N. and Bugeja, M.K. (2017), “A review on
Arif, M.U. and Haider, S. (2018), “A flexible evolutionary multi-robot systems categorised by application domain”, in:
algorithm for task allocation in multi-robot team”, in: 2017 25th Mediterranean Conference on Control and
International Conference on Computational Collective Automation (MED), IEEE.
Intelligence, Springer. D’Emidio, M. and Khan, I. (2017), “Multi-robot task
Badreldin, M., Hussein, A. and Khamis, A. (2013), “A allocation problem: current trends and new ideas”, in: Joint
comparative study between optimization and Market-Based Proceedings of the 18th Italian Conference on Theoretical
approaches to Multi-Robot task allocation”, Advances in Computer Science and the 32nd Italian Conference on
Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 2013(16877470). Computational Logic (ICTCS/CILC).
Bänziger, T., Kunz, A. and Wegener, K. (2018), “Optimizing dos Reis, W.P.N. and Bastos, G.S. (2017), “An arrovian view
human–robot task allocation using a simulation tool based on the multi-robot task allocation problem”, in: 2017 18th
on standardized work descriptions”, Journal of Intelligent International Conference on Advanced Robotics (ICAR), IEEE.
Manufacturing, Vol. 31 No. 7. Dutta, A., Ufimtsev, V. and Asaithambi, A. (2019),
Biswas, S., Anavatti, S.G. and Garratt, M.A. (2017), “Nearest “Correlation clustering based coalition formation for multi-
neighbour based task allocation with multi-agent path robot task allocation”, in: Proceedings of the 34th ACM/
planning in dynamic environments”, in: 2017 International SIGAPP Symposium on Applied Computing.
Conference on Advanced Mechatronics, Intelligent Manufacture, ElGibreen, H. and Youcef-Toumi, K. (2019), “Dynamic task
and Industrial Automation (ICAMIMIA), IEEE. allocation in an uncertain environment with heterogeneous

939
 Task allocation strategies Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
Seenu N. et al. Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942

multi-agents”, Autonomous Robots, Vol. 43 No. 7, IEEE International Conference on Robotics and biomimetics
pp. 1639-1664. (ROBIO), IEEE.
Faigl, J., Kulich, M. and Preučil, L. (2012), “Goal assignment Jin, L., Li, S., La, H.M., Zhang, X. and Hu, B. (2019),
using distance cost in multi-robot exploration”, in: 2012 “Dynamic task allocation in multi-robot coordination for
IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and moving target tracking: a distributed approach”, Automatica,
Systems, IEEE. Vol. 100, pp. 75-81.
Fang, B., Zhang, Q., Wang, H. and Yuan, X. (2018), Johnson, L.B., Choi, H.-L. and How, J.P. (2016), “The role of
“Personality driven task allocation for emotional robot information assumptions in decentralized task allocation: a
team”, International Journal of Machine Learning and tutorial”, IEEE Control Systems Magazine, Vol. 36 No. 4,
Cybernetics, Vol. 9 No. 12, pp. 1955-1962. pp. 45-58.
Farinelli, A., Iocchi, L. and Nardi, D. (2017), “Distributed on- Kanakia, A., Touri, B. and Correll, N. (2016), “Modeling
line dynamic task assignment for multi-robot patrolling”, multi-robot task allocation with limited information as global
Autonomous Robots, Vol. 41 No. 6, pp. 1321-1345. game”, Swarm Intelligence, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 147-160.
Gerkey, B.P. and Matari
c, M.J. (2004), “A formal analysis and Kartal, B., Nunes, J. Godoy, E. and Gini, M. (2016), “Monte
taxonomy of task allocation in multi-robot systems”, The Carlo tree search with branch and bound for multi-robot task
International Journal of Robotics Research, Vol. 23 No. 9, allocation”, in: The IJCAI-16 Workshop on Autonomous
pp. 939-954. Mobile Service Robots.
Ghassemi, P. and Chowdhury, S. (2018), “Decentralized task Khamis, A., Hussein, A. and Elmogy, A. (2015), Multi-Robot
allocation in multi-robot systems via bipartite graph Task Allocation: A Review of the State-of-the-Art. Cooperative
matching augmented with fuzzy clustering”, in: International Robots and Sensor Networks, 2015, Springer, pp.31-51.
Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Khani, M., Ahmadi, A. and Hajary, H. (2019), “Distributed
Information in Engineering Conference, American Society of task allocation in multi-agent environments using cellular
Mechanical Engineers. learning automata”, Soft Computing, Vol. 23 No. 4,
Giordani, S., Lujak, M. and Martinelli, F. (2010), “A
pp. 1199-1218.
distributed algorithm for the multi-robot task allocation Korsah, G.A., Stentz, A. and Dias, M.B. (2013), “A
problem”, in: International conference on industrial, engineering
comprehensive taxonomy for multi-robot task allocation”,
and other applications of applied intelligent systems, Springer.
The International Journal of Robotics Research, Vol. 32 No. 12,
Giordani, S., Lujak, M. and Martinelli, F. (2013), “A
pp. 1495-1512.
distributed multi-agent production planning and scheduling
Lee, D.-H. (2018), “Resource-based task allocation for multi-
framework for mobile robots”, Computers & Industrial
robot systems”, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Vol. 103,
Engineering, Vol. 64 No. 1, pp. 19-30.
pp. 151-161.
Hooshangi, N. and Alesheikh, A.A. (2017), “Agent-based task
Lee, W. and Kim, D. (2017), “History-based response
allocation under uncertainties in disaster environments: an
threshold model for division of labor in multi-agent
approach to interval uncertainty”, International Journal of
systems”, Sensors, Vol. 17 No. 6, p. 1232.
Disaster Risk Reduction, Vol. 24, pp. 160-171.
Lee, W. and Kim, D. (2019), “Adaptive approach to regulate
Huang, L., Ding, Y., Zhou, M., Jin, Y. and Hao, K. (2018),
task distribution in swarm robotic systems”, Swarm and
“Multiple-solution optimization strategy for multirobot task
allocation”, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Evolutionary Computation, Vol. 44, pp. 1108-1118.
Cybernetics: Systems. Lee, D.-H., Zaheer, S.A. and Kim, J.-H. (2014), “Ad hoc
Irfan, M. and Farooq, A. (2016), “Auction-based task network-based task allocation with resource-aware cost
allocation scheme for dynamic coalition formations in generation for multirobot systems”, IEEE Transactions on
limited robotic swarms with heterogeneous capabilities”, in: Industrial Electronics, Vol. 61 No. 12, pp. 6871-6881.
2016 International Conference on Intelligent Systems Engineering Lerman, K., Jones, C., Galstyan, A. and Matari
c, M.J. (2006),
(ICISE), IEEE. “Analysis of dynamic task allocation in multi-robot systems”,
Ismail, Z.H. and Sariff, N. (2018), A Survey and Analysis of The International Journal of Robotics Research, Vol. 25 No. 3,
Cooperative Multi-Agent Robot Systems: challenges and pp. 225-241.
Directions, Applications of Mobile Robots, IntechOpen. Li, Z. and Li, X. (2017), “Research on model and algorithm of
Jang, I., Shin, H.-S. and Tsourdos, A. (2018), “Anonymous task allocation and path planning for multi-robot”, Open
hedonic game for task allocation in a large-scale multiple Journal of Applied Sciences, Vol. 7 No. 10, pp. 511.
agent system”, IEEE Transactions on Robotics, Vol. 34 No. 6, Li, J. and Yang, F. (2018), “Research on multi-robot
pp. 1534-1548. scheduling algorithms based on machine vision”, EURASIP
Jevtic, A., Gutiérrez, A., Andina, D. and Jamshidi, M. (2011), Journal on Image and Video Processing, Vol. 2018 No. 1,
“Distributed bees algorithm for task allocation in swarm of pp. 1-11.
robots”, IEEE Systems Journal, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 296-304. Li, D., Fan, Q. and Dai, X. (2017a), “Research status of multi-
Jha, S.S. and Nair, S.B. (2017), “TANSA: task allocation using robot systems task allocation and uncertainty treatment”, in:
nomadic soft agents for multirobot systems”, IEEE J. Phys. Conf. Ser.
Transactions on Emerging Topics in Computational Intelligence, Li, X., Liu, Z. and Tan, F. (2017b), “Multi-robot task
Vol. 2 No. 4, pp. 308-318. allocation based on cloud ant colony algorithm”, in:
Jia, X. and Meng, M.Q.-H. (2013), “A survey and analysis of International Conference on Neural Information Processing,
task allocation algorithms in multi-robot systems”, in: 2013 Springer.

940
 Task allocation strategies Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
Seenu N. et al. Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942

Liekna, A., Lavendelis, E. and Grabovskis, A. (2012), robot task allocation with precedence constraints”, Defence
“Experimental analysis of contract net protocol in multi- Science Journal, Vol. 68 No. 2.
robot task allocation”, Applied Computer Systems, Vol. 13 Palmer, A.W., Hill, A.J. and Scheding, S.J. (2018), “Modelling
No. 1, pp. 6-14. resource contention in multi-robot task allocation problems
Liu, C. and Kroll, A. (2012), “A centralized multi-robot task with uncertain timing”, in: 2018 IEEE International
allocation for industrial plant inspection by using a and Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE.
genetic algorithms”, in: International Conference on Artificial Riccio, F., Borzi, E., Gemignani, G. and Nardi, D. (2016),
Intelligence and Soft Computing, Springer. “Multi-robot search for a moving target: integrating world
Liu, L. and Shell, D.A. (2012), “Large-scale multi-robot task modeling, task assignment and context”, in: 2016 IEEE/RSJ
allocation via dynamic partitioning and distribution”, International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems
Autonomous Robots, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 291-307. (IROS), IEEE.
Liu, L. and Shell, D.A. (2013), Optimal Market-Based Multi- Rishwaraj, G. and Ponnambalam, S. (2017), “Integrated trust
Robot Task Allocation via Strategic Pricing. in: Robotics, based control system for multirobot systems: development
Science and Systems. and experimentation in real environment”, Expert Systems
Liu, S., Kurniawan, E., Tan, P.H., Zhang, P., Sun, S. and Ye, with Applications, Vol. 86, pp. 177-189.
S. (2017), “Dynamic scheduling for heterogeneous Sarkar, C., Dey, S. and Agarwal, M. (2018a), “Semantic
resources with time windows and precedence relation”, in: knowledge driven utility calculation towards efficient multi-
TENCON 2017-2017 IEEE Region 10 Conference, IEEE. robot task allocation”, in: 2018 IEEE 14th International
Lu, Q., Hecker, J.P. and Moses, M.E. (2018), “Multiple-place Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE),
swarm foraging with dynamic depots”, Autonomous Robots, IEEE.
Vol. 42 No. 4, pp. 909-926. Sarkar, C., Paul, H.S. and Pal, A. (2018b), “A scalable multi-
Luo, L., Chakraborty, N. and Sycara, K. (2012), “Competitive robot task allocation algorithm”, in: 2018 IEEE International
analysis of repeated greedy auction algorithm for online Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), IEEE.
multi-robot task assignment”, in: 2012 IEEE International Schillinger, P., Bürger, M. and Dimarogonas, D.V. (2018),
“Simultaneous task allocation and planning for temporal
Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE.
logic goals in heterogeneous multi-robot systems”, The
Luo, L., Chakraborty, N. and Sycara, K. (2014), “Provably-
International Journal of Robotics Research, Vol. 37 No. 7,
good distributed algorithm for constrained multi-robot task
pp. 818-838.
assignment for grouped tasks”, IEEE Transactions on
Schillinger, P., Bürger, M. and Dimarogonas, D.V. (2019),
Robotics, Vol. 31 No. 1, pp. 19-30.
“Hierarchical LTL-Task MDPs for Multi-Agent
Luo, L., Chakraborty, N. and Sycara, K. (2015), “Distributed
coordination through auctioning and learning”, The
algorithms for multirobot task assignment with task deadline
International Journal of Robotics Research,
constraints”, IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and
Schneider, E., Sklar, E.I. and Parsons, S. (2017), “Mechanism
Engineering, Vol. 12 No. 3, pp. 876-888.
selection for multi-robot task allocation”, in: Annual
Mitiche, H., Boughaci, D. and Gini, M. (2019), “Iterated local
Conference Towards Autonomous Robotic Systems, Springer.
search for time-extended multi-robot task allocation with
Semwal, T., Jha, S.S. and Nair, S.B. (2017), “On ordering
spatio-temporal and capacity constraints”, Journal of multi-robot task executions within a cyber physical system”,
Intelligent Systems, Vol. 28 No. 2, pp. 347-360. ACM Transactions on Autonomous and Adaptive Systems
Muhuri, P.K. and Rauniyar, A. (2017), “Immigrants based (Systems), Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 1-27.
adaptive genetic algorithms for task allocation in multi-robot Shenoy, M.V. and Anupama, K. (2017), “DTTA-Distributed,
systems”, International Journal of Computational Intelligence time-division multiple access based task allocation
and Applications, Vol. 16 No. 4, p. 1750025. framework for swarm robots”, Defence Science Journal,
Nam, C. and Shell, D. (2016), An Empirical Study of Task Vol. 67 No. 3, p. 316.
Bundling for Sequential Stochastic Tasks in Multi-Robot Task Su, X., Wang, Y., Jia, X., Guo, L. and Ding, Z. (2018), “Two
Allocation, Technical Report TAMU-CSE-16-7-1, CSE innovative coalition formation models for dynamic task
Department, TX A&M University. allocation in disaster rescues”, Journal of Systems Science and
Notomista, G., Mayya, S., Hutchinson, S. and Egerstedt, M. Systems Engineering, Vol. 27 No. 2, pp. 215-230.
(2019), “An optimal task allocation strategy for Sung, Y., Budhiraja, A.K., Williams, R.K. and Tokekar, P.
heterogeneous multi-robot systems”, in: 2019 18th European (2018), “Distributed simultaneous action and target
Control Conference (ECC), IEEE. assignment for multi-robot multi-target tracking”, in: 2018
Nunes, E., Manner, M., Mitiche, H. and Gini, M. (2017), “A IEEE International conference on robotics and automation
taxonomy for task allocation problems with temporal and (ICRA), IEEE.
ordering constraints”, Robotics and Autonomous Systems, Talebpour, Z. and Martinoli, A. (2018), “Risk-based human-
Vol. 90, pp. 55-70. aware multi-robot coordination in dynamic environments
Otte, M., Kuhlman, M.J. and Sofge, D. (2020), “Auctions for shared with humans”, in: 2018 IEEE/RSJ International
multi-robot task allocation in communication limited Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), IEEE.
environments”, Autonomous Robots, Vol. 44 Nos 3/4, Tolmidis, A.T. and Petrou, L. (2013), “Multi-objective
pp. 547-584. optimization for dynamic task allocation in a multi-robot
Padmanabhan Panchu, K., Rajmohan, M., Sundar, R. and system”, Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence,
Baskaran, R. (2018), “Multi-objective optimisation of multi- Vol. 26 Nos 5/6, pp. 1458-1468.

941
 Task allocation strategies Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application
Seenu N. et al. Volume 47 · Number 6 · 2020 · 929–942

Tsang, K.F.E., Ni, Y., Wong, C.F.R. and Shi, L. (2018), “A systems with limited energy resources”, IEEE/CAA Journal of
novel warehouse multi-robot automation system with semi- Automatica Sinica, Vol. 5 No. 1, pp. 155-168.
complete and computationally efficient path planning and Xie, B., Gu, X., Chen, J. and Shen, L. (2018), “A multi-
adaptive genetic task allocation algorithms”, in: 2018 15th responsibility–oriented coalition formation framework for
International Conference on Control, Automation, Robotics and dynamic task allocation in mobile–distributed multi-agent
Vision (ICARCV), IEEE. systems”, International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems,
Turner, J. (2018), “Distributed task allocation optimisation Vol. 15 No. 6, pp. 1729881418813037.
techniques”, in: Proceedings of the 17th international conference Yi, X., Zhu, A., Yang, S.X. and Luo, C. (2016), “A bio-
on autonomous agents and multiagent systems. inspired approach to task assignment of swarm robots in 3-D
Turner, J., Meng, Q., Schaefer, G., Whitbrook, A. and dynamic environments”, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics,
Soltoggio, A. (2017), “Distributed task rescheduling with Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 974-983.
time constraints for the optimization of total task allocations Zhang, K., Collins, E.G., Jr. and Shi, D. (2012), “Centralized
in a multirobot system”, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, and distributed task allocation in multi-robot teams via a
Vol. 48 No. 9, pp. 2583-2597. stochastic clustering auction”, ACM Transactions on
Wang, J., Gu, Y. and Li, X. (2012), “Multi-robot task Autonomous and Adaptive Systems (Systems), Vol. 7 No. 2,
allocation based on ant colony algorithm”, Journal of pp. 1-22.
Zhao, W., Meng, Q. and Chung, P.W. (2015), “A heuristic
Computers, Vol. 7 No. 9, pp. 2160-2167.
distributed task allocation method for multivehicle multitask
Wang, X., Rui, F. and Hu, H. (2018), “Task allocation policy
problems and its application to search and rescue scenario”,
for UGV systems using colored petri nets”, in: 2018 Annual
IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics, Vol. 46 No. 4, pp. 902-915.
American Control Conference (ACC), IEEE.
Zhou, X., Wang, H., Ding, B., Hu, T. and Shang, S. (2019),
Wawerla, J. and Vaughan, R.T. (2010), “A fast and frugal
“Balanced connected task allocations for multi-robot
method for team-task allocation in a multi-robot
systems: an exact flow-based integer program and an
transportation system”, in: 2010 IEEE International
approximate tree-based genetic algorithm”, Expert Systems
Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE. with Applications, Vol. 116, pp. 10-20.
Wei, C., Hindriks, K.V. and Jonker, C.M. (2016), “Dynamic Zhu, Z., Tang, B. and Yuan, J. (2017), “Multirobot task
task allocation for multi-robot search and retrieval tasks”, allocation based on an improved particle swarm optimization
Applied Intelligence, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 383-401. approach”, International Journal of Advanced Robotic Systems,
Whitbrook, A., Meng, Q. and Chung, P.W. (2019), Vol. 14 No. 3, p. 1729881417710312.
“Addressing robustness in time-critical, distributed, task Zhu, D., Cao, X., Sun, B. and Luo, C. (2017), “Biologically
allocation algorithms”, Applied Intelligence, Vol. 49 No. 1, inspired self-organizing map applied to task assignment and
pp. 1-15. path planning of an AUV system”, IEEE Transactions on
Woosley, B. and Dasgupta, P. (2018), “Integrated real-time Cognitive and Developmental Systems, Vol. 10 No. 2,
task and motion planning for multiple robots under path and pp. 304-313.
communication uncertainties”, Robotica, Vol. 36 No. 3,
pp. 353-373. Corresponding author
Wu, D., Zeng, G., Meng, L., Zhou, W. and Li, L. (2017), Mukund Nilakantan Janardhanan can be contacted at:
“Gini coefficient-based task allocation for multi-robot [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article, please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details: [email protected]

942

View publication stats