Difference between revisions of "Humanitarian demining"
| (One intermediate revision by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | The robot swarm will search for landmines by exploration of an area. Once a mine is found, each swarm member will vote for the best action for defusing the mine; wrong actions will destroy robots in the proximity of the mine. Defusing a mine will be honored with a reward that is automatically distributed to the swarm members as specified by a smart contract. If a robot is unsure of an action, it can keep a greater distance to the mine to prevent being destroyed. The blockchain will serve as medium for collecting the votes and will ensure transparency of the voting process for all members. However, malicious agents might deliberately vote for a harmful action to destroy the swarm. Hence, each vote will be weighted with the reputation of the respective member, which is related to its number of successfully defused mines. I will analyze the dynamics of the voting process and the size of the swarm over time. Additionally, I will evaluate its robustness as a function of the number of malicious agents. |
||
| − | The robot swarm will search for |
||
| − | landmines by exploration of an area. Once a mine is |
||
| − | found, each swarm member will vote for the best action for defusing |
||
| − | the mine; wrong actions will destroy robots in the proximity of the |
||
| − | mine. Defusing a mine will be |
||
| − | honored with a monetary reward that is automatically distributed to |
||
| − | the swarm members as specified by a smart contract. If a robot is unsure of an action, it can keep a greater |
||
| − | distance to the mine to prevent being destroyed. The blockchain will |
||
| − | serve as medium for collecting the votes and will ensure |
||
| − | transparency of the voting process for all members. However, |
||
| − | malicious agents might deliberately vote for a harmful action to |
||
| − | destroy the swarm. Hence, each vote will be weighted with the reputation of the respective member, which is related to |
||
| − | its number of successfully defused mines. I will analyze the |
||
| − | dynamics of the voting process and the size of the swarm over |
||
| − | time. Additionally, I will evaluate its robustness as a function of |
||
| − | the number of malicious agents. |
||
Latest revision as of 22:50, 21 November 2016
The robot swarm will search for landmines by exploration of an area. Once a mine is found, each swarm member will vote for the best action for defusing the mine; wrong actions will destroy robots in the proximity of the mine. Defusing a mine will be honored with a reward that is automatically distributed to the swarm members as specified by a smart contract. If a robot is unsure of an action, it can keep a greater distance to the mine to prevent being destroyed. The blockchain will serve as medium for collecting the votes and will ensure transparency of the voting process for all members. However, malicious agents might deliberately vote for a harmful action to destroy the swarm. Hence, each vote will be weighted with the reputation of the respective member, which is related to its number of successfully defused mines. I will analyze the dynamics of the voting process and the size of the swarm over time. Additionally, I will evaluate its robustness as a function of the number of malicious agents.
