Secure and secret cooperation in robotic swarms
Open accessPreprint — published as 10.1126/scirobotics.abf1538
Abstract
The importance of swarm robotics systems in both academic research and real-world applications is steadily increasing. However, to reach widespread adoption, new models that ensure the secure cooperation of large groups of robots need to be developed. This work introduces a novel method to encapsulate cooperative robotic missions in an authenticated data structure known as Merkle tree. With this method, operators can provide the "blueprint" of the swarm's mission without disclosing its raw data. In other words, data verification can be separated from data itself. We propose a system where robots in a swarm, to cooperate towards mission completion, have to "prove" their integrity to their peers by exchanging cryptographic proofs. We show the implications of this approach for two different swarm robotics missions: foraging and maze formation. In both missions, swarm robots were able to cooperate and carry out sequential operations without having explicit knowledge about the mission's high-level objectives. The results presented in this work demonstrate the feasibility of using Merkle trees as a cooperation mechanism for swarm robotics systems in both simulation and real-robot experiments, which has implications for future decentralized robotics applications where security plays a crucial role such as environmental monitoring, infrastructure surveillance, and disaster management.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Human-swarm interaction will be necessary to provide the swarm with information about goals to be achieved or tasks to be performed.
“Human-swarm interaction (HSI) will be necessary to provide the swarm with information about goals to be achieved or tasks to be performed [103], [104].”
From Swarm Robotics: Past, Present, and Future [Point of View] (2021) · cites this paper as [104]
Cites
Strobel, V., Castelló Ferrer, E., & Dorigo, M. (2018) · International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems · doi:10.65109/nlel1871 · Cited by 149 · see citing works
Self-citation
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Swarm Robotics: Past, Present, and Future [Point of View]
Dorigo, M., Theraulaz, G., & Trianni, V. (2021) · Proceedings of the IEEE · doi:10.1109/jproc.2021.3072740 · Cited by 401 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Ferrer, E. C., Hardjono, T., Pentland, A. '., & Dorigo, M.
- Affiliations
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US)
- Venue
- arXiv
- Publisher
- arXiv
- Published
- 2019
- ISSN
- 2331-8422 (ISSN-L)
- arXiv
- 1904.09266
- OpenAlex
- W3145530379
- Cited by
- 0
- References
- 1
- Type
- posted content
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Mechanical Engineering › Modular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Networks and Communications › Distributed Control Multi-Agent Systems
- Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Cryptography and Data Security
- Keywords
- swarm robotics, Merkle trees, cryptographic proofs, data integrity verification, foraging, environmental monitoring
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review