Proceedings of the 2004 EEE
International Symposium on Intelligent Control
Taipei, Taiwan, September 2-4,2004
A Behavior-based Architecture for Unmanned Aerial
Vehicles
Miaobo Dong and Zengqi Sun
Abshacr - This paper proposes an overall behavior-based con-
trol seheme for unmanned aerial vehieles (UAVs), from eoneept
to implementation. Task plan, event disposal and vehicle-user
cooperation arc integrated in the architecture. The work is of
three parts: First, basic issues for behavior-based architecture
are discussed, including delinition of behaviors, behavior
modes, the concept of schema and user intervention. Seeond,we
give a brief version of software-psrt of the architecture, ma!+
out an overall family of sehema for UAV. The schema, whieh
defined BS an event-driven behavior program, is designed to
conduct the UAV operation. Third, the system strnehlre for the
arehitrrture is proposed consisting of ground station (users),
schema block and behavior executor. We make B major disrus-
sion on behavior execution, giving a method linking UAV be-
haviors with flight control system that used to be complicated
and hiersrchicsl. The idea of eomponentidiazation is involved.
Human-machine rooperation is a strong C O O C L I ~ and ides of
layered rooperation is employed io this paper.
I. INTROCDUCTION
U AVs have undergone a rapid progress in the past decades.
They are more likely to take pafl in tasks too risky for hu-
man participation and prospected to be an integral part in the
future warfare.
An overall control scheme for UAVs needs to implement lid
autonomous functions. These tasks used to be implemented by
pilots as listed below should be transferred to the on-board wn-
troller.
planning for task, automatically creating operation program
. as a task assigned to the UAV,
event disposal, automatically execute special operations to
deal with some emergent arisen like obstacle, enemy unit,
and device failure as well;
Manusmipi received May 22.2004. This work was jointly supported by
the National High Technique Ro~am(2003AA118402).the National Key
Project for Basic Research of China (G2003cb312205), the National Sci-
a c e Foundation of china(60174018 , 60305008 , 60334020 ,
90205008 )
Miaobo Dong is with Graduate School ai Sheuzhen. Tsinghua Univer-
sity, S h a d e n , 518057, P.R.C.(phone: +86-755-26036870: e-mail
mbdon&@l63,net)
Zengqi Sun is wih State Key Laboratory of lntelligat Technology and
Systems, Tsioghua University, Belling 100084, P.R.C. (phone:
186-10-62788939;e-mail: szq-dfr~mail.tsinghua.educn)
0-7803-8635-3/04/$20.0002004 IEEE
.
communication with station, by which tasks are assigned,
operation are transfared and plan are customized
Behavior-based architecture, \r3licb are nowadays success-
fully applied in robotic control""', evolved from conventional
attificial intelligenceas wmbmation with automation is wanted.
In the architechre, wntrol fimction are itemized / componen-
tialized that is, distributed to a variety of function items, and the
whole function is h m these items by different slructmal com-
binations. The operation of the agency is reactive - event-driven.
More about behavior-based architecturesare in [l-61.
Literature [7] gives investigation much near to this paper,
presenting a behavior-based control smcture for helicopters
with background of a task contest.
Our works base on the following understanding: a UAV
works by continuously making decisions and making behaviors,
which are considered as segmentsof signals. The paper is on the
question: how a UAV makes decisions, and how it makes be-
haviors.
Three main parts of this paper are: 1) interpretation of be-
havior-based architedure with some extension issues like b e
havior defition, behavior modes, introduction of schema and
user-agency relation. 2) giving a brief version of an overall
scheme family for UAVs with two simple tasks and two possi-
ble events. A discussion on user intenention and schema r a n -
figmtion is c h e d oat. 3) presenting the struchre of behav-
ior-based UAV system consisting of onboard part and ground
part. The mechanism of behavior executor - bow behaviors are
executed by tlight control system, is presented. The idea of
wnpnentialization is employed.
Human-machine woperation is a strong wncem a m s s the
paper. Multiple roles buman plays are discussed The idea of
layered cooperationis mainly inherited fiom [ 8 ] .
11. BEHAVIOR-BASED ARCHITECTURE
In traditional control, control signal are generated by a con-
trol law as response to the feedback from the object or the envi-
ronment. A single rule is bold in the whole pmcess. In behav-
ior-based architecturethe signal is created in terms ofbehaviors.
The whole control process is conjunct by different periods of
control functions -behaviors. The agency changes its behaviors
in the pmcess, switching between multiple control rules and is
149
not limited in a single one. Traditional control method is gena-
ally for one simple object or plant. The behavior-based archi-
teCtme is generally for an intelligent agent and a rather complex
environment with a series of tasks. The whole is a control
scheme with behavior planning and event higgenhg. Robotics is
the best area for its application.
A . Behavior
Behavior can be defined h m dual sides: extend and inter-
nal, corresponding to the noun behavior and the verb be
have. As to a behavior agency, a human or a machine agent, a
behavior is afunction between the sensing itput awl the miion
ourput infernally and a segment of the s i p / e x t e d i y . char-
acteristics and skills of a behavior are contajned in its intemal
law and exhibited by the shape of its si& output. Changing of
behaviors is function switching internally and signal segment
conjunction extemally. The regular definition of behavior -
senseaction connection is mainly from the side of internal
mechanism However, this paper will go on discussion on both
sides.
A behavior is generally related to a set of parameters, usually
representing the state of agency, the objective and the perform-
ance. For example, a walking behavior of a mobile robotics may
be expressed by walk(4bj m which a and b are current and
objective position. Additional factors like walking speed may be
taken account as well according to practice. Parametem set the
propem of the in& function that is shown in shape of the
I
Fig I Modffofkhavias
Behaviors can be classified in three categories by principle of
execution: 1) control law based behaviors (closed loop), 2) sig-
MI based behaviors (open loop) and 3) user o p e d o & as fig. 1
shom. control law based behaviors are executed by traditional
control principle. The behavior signal is generated by cntain
control law as response to the sensor input. The execntor is ac-
tually a controller and the mechanism is closed-looped.A signal
based behavior is based on an experienced segment of signal,
without a stimuli-response function. L i e a reflexive action of
human, the executor directly generates a period of signal based
on experience as stimulated by some event. The shape of the
signal segment represents the operation SM.The behavior may
be considered as reflexive operation. User operation is regarded
as a third kind of behavior, by which the user takes over the
execution of the behavior, and directly operates in replacement
of the machine agency d c h therefore transforms into a simple
operation passer. It can be h o w as machine borrowing skills
from human. And it is the channel by which human and agency
cooperates in the opeation layer (human machine cooperation
in the architecturewill be discussed later).
B. Schema
A schema is a program of behavior that is used to conduct the
agencys operations. Regular plan aligns behaviors in series that
occm one after another. However, as various events need to be
dealt with, which lead to diverse processing branches, series
t p e plan is no more competent and pattem like schema is em-
ployed.
As one event occms, switching fium cnrrent behavior to an-
other one is performed Events have extensive meanings and
represent various situations. They are classified into three cate-
gories.
1) environment events, those determined by environment,
such as enemy emergence, obstacle arisen, etc, and device fail-
ure included as well. They are observes in sensor input as
some exceptive changes appear. Events of this kind are those of
general sense. Handling of them is emergent and reactive.
2) scheduled events, those that is scheduled for sake of b e
havior programming,to m g e the end of one behavior and the
beginning of another one. They define ending conditions of
behaviors, such as goal place reaches, segment operation
completed, stopped. etc.
3) user events, those generated by user intent for task as-
signment opmtion intervention or any need for mimic event.
There are two general types: code for task assignment and op-
eration request.
A schema is composed a set of behaviors and events. Each
behavior is associated with a number of events that may occw
during the behavior. Each event higgers a next behavior. Re-
garding a behavior as a node and an event a line (that C O M ~ ~ ~ S
to anotha node). a schema is actually a program p a t t m An
agency operates along the guidmce of the schema - behavior,
event, second behavior, event, third behavior .._.walking
through a path in the schema pattem.
An example may help to illushate how a schema works. Con-
sider a regular instance that a Unit moves f A to B and
enwunters an unexpected obstacle midway. Current moving
behavior must be interrupted and the reactive avoiding behavior
should he called instantly. Aftm the obstacle is avoided the
moving behavior is resumed Such scenario may represented by
150
i n d o n of behavior as plotted in fig. 2. A schema is con-
structed to illustrate the handling as shown at the underside. It's
a pattern work of behaviors and events. Behaviors of shifl and
avoiding are represented hy two nodes. The occ-ce of the
event and calling to the instant avoiding operation is represented
by a connection fonn shifl to avoiding. Another connection back
represents the resuming of moving. It is oflen a p m of a h o l e
schema, representing a common way of event disposal. An in-
tegral schema for more complicated tasks and various events is
much more complex.
unexpected obs12icle obsaclc Bund obasclcaroided
(behavior insertion)
obstacle found A-%
(SCHEMA)
Fig 2 Behavior insertionand &em
A schema may call another schema as an item in its panem.
The propnty of schema is much like s o h a r e program, each
behavior is like a sentence in the program, a schema is like a
function in the program and an event is a call to a new behavior
or schema. A schema-based mechanism therefore is an
eventdriven program. As compared with conventional hehav-
ior-based reactive mechanismfM'.the latter is an event-driven
automation.
C. User and agency
Relationship between user and agency used to slide to hvo
opposite directions: full autonomy or teleoperation. The former
exclude the user intervention and the latter reniove any automa-
tion ofthe agency.
This paper holds a view of humanmachine cooperation and
mostly inherits the idea of layered cooperation fiom [8]. Users
and agency keep cooperation in different layers - operation
layer. schema layer and beyond-schema layer. In operation layer,
the user sometimes takes the direct operation of the agency.
USWoperations are directly transferred as action outputs of the
agency, known as mode (3) behaviors In schema layer, user?
and agency interact by events. User order or request are treated
as event and triggered corresponding schema branches. A be-
yond-schema layer cooperation is defined for online schema
151
recon&uation because there are situations necessary for user to
alter schemas dpmically. Users in the architectureplay multi-
ple roles of an assistant operator, a momunder and a schema
maker. More detailed description will be given in later discuss
about UAVs.
User-agency cooperation relies on communication. For
long-range systems like UAV's, the lag and other drawbacks
need to he considered. Reasonable way of cwperation is the
user for discrete task assignment and the agency for real-time
operation unless some critical matter arises and user pilot has
better confidence.
In. A BEHAVIOR-BASED SCHEMA FAMILY FOR
UAV
As to a UAV for multiple tasks, an overall schema family
needs to he constructed for these tasks and various events. A
simple version of schema family for a UAV is presented here.
The UAV is projected for two tasks: 1) reconnaissance, flyingto
a specific location md rehieve useful infomatin& 2) shift,
moving iiom one base to another. Two general events are
wanted to handle: emergence of obstacle and suspicioustarget
Behaviors and schemas are Listed in table 1 each with a iden-
tifylng number. Nine behaviors are d e k e d for UAV to run at
all stages. Ibe subaerial part consists of move, accelerate and
decelerate, providing subaerial operations for taking off and
landing. The aerial part consists of IiJitdescend, hod to, hover
and track. Track here includes any trajectoly-trackingoperations.
Parameters for behavior are listed right side. The behavior pho-
rogrqh represents the spy operation, combined with hover as
hovei+photograph. The ready state of UAV is considered as an
enduring behavior.
Panems of all schemas are shown in fig. 3. Each is decom-
posed into behaviors and sub-schemas. The main schema (17)
consists of ready, recon and ship. The UAV is initially m ready
state. Code oftask fiom user biggers it to execute corresponding
task, and retum to ready state afler the task is accomplished
Schema recon and sh@, each has two results - successful exe-
cution or abortion because ofpotential danger. As danger arises,
the UAV give up the task and choose to r e m at that time. Two
possible events of environment are considered and programmed
in schemaJy ro, in whjch two reactive loops are designed. Ifan
obstacle is found an avoiding wwse - schema avoid is called
and if a sospicioustarget is found, a detection (schema detect) is
performed to determine whether the object is safe or dangerous,
resulting m different consequent handling. Two basic schemas
of fakeofand land are programmed as a snies of regular opera-
tions.
0 ready none lotakeoff height 1,2;1,6
1 move - .wsition
tareet 11 land oosition. orientation 1.3.4.7
.,_
2 accelerate acceleration I 12flyto target place 7,13,14
3 decelerate deceleration 13 avoid haghtof obstacle 4,6
4 liWdescend lift rate 14 detect target position 739
5 head to oricntatiodtaxget I5 recon target position 7,8,9,10,11,12
6 hover roll angle 16 shifl position 7,10,11,12
7 hack trajecto, 17 main none 0,15,16
8 photograph None

Fle3 Schema Famik faUAV

*que=
10 speckfir height B resched

takeoff Euspiciour
order taget
A re ched
isbed (3)
(4) I4 Evqicio" rare
La"
detect C dangcmvr
5
detect s ~ ~ p i ~ i o n s t a l g e t mtvn A

(dynamic reconfiguration)

152
 W . USER INTERVENTION AND SCHEMA RECON-
FIGURATION
As stated in section users are cooperative and multi-
fold-functional part in the architecture. Cooperation between
users and the aircrafl in three layers are kept.
In operation layer. the user plays d e of tele-pilot.
when the aircraft drop into some serious situation such as an
off n o d state that need expetienced manual plot to help out.
The user takes charge of pilot in replacement of the autonomous
system instantly. Any way, it's a way of remote control. and the
associativeproblem of communication need to be considered.
In schema layer. the use^ iostructs the nmning progress of
schema by sending command codes. These codes are treated as
events like any other environment events, triggning schema
entering corresponding execuiion branches.
The user and the UAV cooperate in another higher layer -
beyond-schema layer. Schemas for UAV, which was built in the
onboard controller, need to he reconligured as some exceptive
situations arise. On this occasion, the user sends reconfiguration
codes to the flying aircraft and make online alteration on the
schema, to make it fitted for the new condition, for example,
inserting a new mission, canceling a scheduled task, simplifying
handling of some events. Oynamic alteration made on the
schema, is corresponding to revising opmtion on the schema
pattan like cutting, adding an event connection, removing,
inserting a new node of behavior or subschema
An instance is presented here to illustrate how reconligma-
tions are made on an original schema for several different con-
ditions. Fig. 4 shows a schema for task of shifl with considera-
tion of event of suspicious target. Four possible altmtions under
different conditions are desnibed on the origind pattem.
1) The user directly pilots the aircraft aAer its takeoff and re-
fum autonomous landing as the goal place is reached Any
events that occm in the flying, is disposed by manual pilot.
2) In repeated executions, as the environment has been
known well and potential danger excluded, the aircratl ignore
the warning of suspicious target to simplify the program and
improve the efficiency. As (2) shows, the bandhg comections
are pruned.
3) To employ a more cautious policy, the aircraft r e m base
without finther detection as any suspicious target arises. Acon-
nection fnmfly to to refumis added for the event of suspicious
target.
4) The user assigns an additional task - to detect a specific
location in the mid-way. An execution branch is added triggered
hythe user order of assignment.
The pattern-like program provides an convenient way for
schema rewniiguration.
153
V. BEHAVIOR-BASED UAV SYSTEM
Two points are concluded for the UAV system. 1) Operation
of the aerial vehicle is conducted hy an integral schema family
that consists of programs for tasks. 2) Users keep layered cwp-
eration with the vehicle.
Fig. 5 shows the diagram of a behavior-based UAV system,
separated in two parts: ground part and onboard part. The
ground part (station) includes users for different duties. The
onboard part includes any device on the aircraft. A family of
schemas is installed in the controller, conducting the running of
the executor. The latter translated behavior into specific control
function, interacting with sensor and actuator. The schema block
and the executor are key components ofthe controller.
GROUND 1 ONBOARD
Fig 5St"eoftheUAVsynem
The schema block follows the event-driven principle. It d e
tects environment events in the sensor input, which represents
an extensive collection of measured information including the
aircraA state, the state of device and any acquisition h m the
environment. A part of scheduled events defined as obtainment
of specific aircraft state, are judged if activated hy the sensor
input as well. User instructions are treated as events as well as
dehed in schemas, higgering corresponding execution
branches.
Users are effective multifold-functional part in the system. As
briefly illmated here, they are classified into commander and
pilot for different duties. ?be commander interacts with the
schema block, sending insauctions to the block to control the
nmning progress, and sending reconfigurationcodes to alter the
schema if necessary. The pilot take remote manipulation of the
executor as manual operation is needed. when the commander
decides to insert a tele-pilot session, he sends an operation re-
quest to the schema block to pause the schema processing and
sends a command to the pilot at the same time. So the pilot can
take charge ofthe executor in replacement ofthe schema block.
when the pilot is end a notification is sent w resume the
schema block.
 A C n V A ' l l n N l 1RT
The executor is a module that implements behaviors. A
method of translation must he developed fiom behavior to wn-
trol action. Flight control system contains various control func-
tions Like pitch control, roll control, altiMe control,etc. They
are hierarchically integrated in much complex@'. A behavior
execution should make arrangement and sening of these control
funcfions. We use a componential designto solve this problem.
Fig. 6 illusbates the mechanism of the executor. Flight wn-
trol complexity is componentialized into items. Each of these
items implements a simple control functions. Basic control
functions and upper-level control function as well, are capsu-
lated in these items listed as A l , A2, B1, ... Every item is re-
garded as a component with specific interface. ?he stNchue of
the system is represented by their collaborative connection.
For every item a set ofparameters is related to it to configme
its function. The parameter is treated as equal to other in-
putloutput information like sensor input and control signal (ac-
tuator). Every item functions through connection to sensor input,
actuator signal and parameters. The figure describes the struc-
ture of the B1 item (pitch control) that employs a pmportiOnal
control law with rate damping. The parameter for it is its objec-
tive s e h g . Other items have similar principles.
These items are organized as a cluster along lines of informa-
tion sensor, actuator and parameter, standing for collection of
~
measurement, achmtors signals, and parameter for all items
respectively. Basic control items Like BI, B2 have directly out-
put signal to actuators. Upper-level items like Cl, C2 function
without connection to actuators, hut with parameter (for other
154
I ITl3lFAMILY
item).
The total control function is yielded by combination of these
items. h overall configuration contains o d o f f state of every
item and parameter for it. Different combination of activated
items and their parameter yield diEerent integral control func-
tion. Each behavior may he translated into a specific c o n f i p -
tion ofitems.
As a behavior is inpuited the translator maps it to an activa-
tion list for all these items, deciding a s e l d o n of activated
items and thkr parameters. When the list is applied to the item
family, the behavior is executed.
As the user iutmenes, he may manipulator the executor hy
seniug the activation list to customize the control function or
directly settingthe output signal to actuators.
VI. SUMMARY
This paper proposed an overall behavior-based architecture
for UAVs. The concept of schema is introduced as behavior
program driven by events. Scheduling, event disposal and user
instruction are all integrated in the schema by principle of event
higgaing. To apply the schema-based mechanism. we conshllct
a simplified family of schemas to conduct the operation of a
UAV, and present the structure of the behavior-based UAV
system.
tematiou Coiifcroiico of I(cibotics anti Autoniation. p p 271 1-2718,
Nice, France, May 1992.
R. A. Brooks. "A Robust Layered Contml System Cor Mobile Ilohot,"
IUUL .loun,al of Robotics aid Aiitoiiiatioii, Vol. IlA-2, i>p 14-23,
1986.

155