Collaborative Robot Coordination Using Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning

  • Authors

    • Dr. Suresh Babu Reddy Professor, Osmania University, India Author
    • Dr. Anita Verma Associate Professor, Banaras Hindu University, India Author

    DOI:

    https://doi.org/10.67228/30715725/IJIARE-2020PI3D7L

    Published 03-05-2020

  • Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (Marl), Collaborative Robots, Multi-Robot Systems, Reinforcement Learning, Distributed Artificial Intelligence, Autonomous Coordination, Swarm Robotics, Cooperative Robotics, Deep Reinforcement Learning, Intelligent Automation, Robot Navigation, Distributed Learning Systems

    Issue

    Section

    Articles

    How to Cite

    [1]
    S. B. Reddy and A. Verma, “Collaborative Robot Coordination Using Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning”, IJIARE, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 01–16, Mar. 2020, doi: 10.67228/30715725/IJIARE-2020PI3D7L.
  • Abstract

    Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning (MARL) has emerged as an important approach for coordinating collaborative robots in industrial automation, warehouse logistics, healthcare, autonomous vehicles, and distributed robotic systems. Traditional centralized robot coordination methods faced limitations such as poor scalability, low adaptability, synchronization issues, and weak fault tolerance in dynamic environments. MARL overcomes these challenges through decentralized learning, where multiple robotic agents interact with the environment, learn from rewards, and improve coordination strategies autonomously. Before 2019, MARL gained significant attention in applications like cooperative navigation, formation control, multi-robot exploration, task allocation, path planning, collision avoidance, and resource sharing. This survey reviews key MARL techniques including Q-learning, Deep Q-Networks (DQN), policy-gradient methods, actor-critic models, and cooperative game-theoretic approaches for robotic coordination. The study explains a structured MARL coordination framework involving environment modeling, state representation, reward optimization, agent communication, and distributed decision-making. Experimental results show that MARL-based robotic systems improve task efficiency, coordination accuracy, energy optimization, adaptability, and collision reduction compared to centralized or heuristic methods. However, challenges such as communication delays, scalability, reward sparsity, non-stationary environments, and convergence instability still remain. The paper concludes that MARL is a promising solution for future intelligent collaborative robotics and highlights future research directions including federated reinforcement learning, explainable AI, edge-based robotic intelligence, and adaptive swarm robotics for Industry 4.0 applications.

  • References

    [1] Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction, R. S. Sutton and A. G. Barto, Reinforcement Learning: An Introduction, 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 2018.

    [2] Christopher J. C. H. Watkins and P. Dayan, “Q-learning,” Machine Learning, vol. 8, no. 3–4, pp. 279–292, 1992.

    [3] Richard Bellman, Dynamic Programming. Princeton, NJ, USA: Princeton University Press, 1957.

    [4] IEEE, M. J. Mataric, “Interaction and Intelligent Behavior,” Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA, 1994.

    [5] L. E. Parker, “Alliance: An architecture for fault tolerant multi-robot cooperation,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, vol. 14, no. 2, pp. 220–240, Apr. 1998.

    [6] Y. Shoham and K. Leyton-Brown, Multiagent Systems: Algorithmic, Game-Theoretic, and Logical Foundations. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 2009.

    [7] M. Tan, “Multi-agent reinforcement learning: Independent vs. cooperative agents,” in Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Machine Learning, Amherst, MA, USA, 1993, pp. 330–337.

    [8] V. Mnih et al., “Human-level control through deep reinforcement learning,” Nature, vol. 518, no. 7540, pp. 529–533, 2015.

    [9] D. Silver et al., “Mastering the game of Go with deep neural networks and tree search,” Nature, vol. 529, no. 7587, pp. 484–489, 2016.

    [10] P. Stone and M. Veloso, “Multiagent systems: A survey from a machine learning perspective,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 345–383, 2000.

    [11] G. Weiss, Multiagent Systems: A Modern Approach to Distributed Artificial Intelligence. Cambridge, MA, USA: MIT Press, 1999.

    [12] S. Russell and P. Norvig, Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA: Pearson, 2010.

    [13] J. Kober, J. A. Bagnell, and J. Peters, “Reinforcement learning in robotics: A survey,” International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 32, no. 11, pp. 1238–1274, 2013.

    [14] M. Wooldridge, An Introduction to MultiAgent Systems, 2nd ed. Hoboken, NJ, USA: Wiley, 2009.

    [15] L. Busoniu, R. Babuska, and B. De Schutter, “A comprehensive survey of multiagent reinforcement learning,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, vol. 38, no. 2, pp. 156–172, Mar. 2008.

  • Downloads

Similar Articles

11-20 of 84

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.