A brief comparison between the Subsumption Architecture and Motor Schema Theory in light of Autonomous Exploration by Be- havior Based Robots

Abstract

Research and development of mobile robot can broadly be divided into two major paradigms, viz. Sense ∆ Plan ∆ Act (SPA) and Behavior Based. Although, majority of the mobile robots developed and reported in the literature follows the SPA approach; yet behavior based research is gaining momentum in the recent years. Reactive architecture is commonly used for implementing behaviors. In general, behavior based systems operate through a set of multiple independent tasks for achieving goals [Grey Walter, Brooks, Arkin, Maja J. Mataric, Mahadevan, Dorigo etc.]. This however calls for modular and layered system architecture [Brooks, 1991]. Subsequently, Motor Schema theory [Arkin, 1989] has been proposed and successfully applied in a few experimental systems. The work reported in this paper compares these two approaches through experimental mobile robots developed at CMERI. The major difference between these two approaches can be summarized as: Subsumption architecture is essentially a priority based approach whereas the Motor Schema theory leads to division of task into multiple smaller and simpler tasks. In this sense “Motor Schema” is an obvious successor of “Subsumption architecture” originally proposed by Brooks.