2020 59th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC)
Jeju Island, Republic of Korea, December 14-18, 2020
A Distributed Connectivity Maintenance Algorithm for a Network of
Unmanned Underwater Vehicles Under Communication Constraints
Devaprakash Muniraj, Mazen Farhood, and Daniel J. Stilwell
Abstract— This work presents a distributed connectivity
maintenance algorithm for a multi-agent system consisting of
unmanned underwater vehicles (UUVs). The vehicles in the
network communicate through a time-division multiple-access
(TDMA) protocol, where only one vehicle can broadcast its
information at any time instant. The TDMA protocol presents a
significant challenge in developing a connectivity maintenance
algorithm, as the vehicles do not have access to the present
positions of their neighbors. We consider a homogeneous
network of UUVs that move in a two-dimensional plane with
bounded linear and angular speeds. The algorithm presented
here uses only local information from an agent’s neighbors
and provides motion constraints, which, if satisfied, ensure the
connectivity of the network. We provide mathematical guaran-
tees of network connectivity for the presented algorithm under
suitable assumptions on each vehicle’s motion planner and
controller. Finally, we present simulation results to demonstrate
the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm.
I. I NTRODUCTION
Multi-agent unmanned underwater vehicle (UUV) mis-
sions, such as mine countermeasures, seabed mapping,
and surveillance, involve cooperation among a group of
UUVs [1]. In many cases, efficient task execution during
such missions necessitates each vehicle to be able to com-
municate with other vehicles in the network through a multi-
hop link [2]. In graph-theoretic parlance, this requirement
translates to maintaining the connectivity of the proximity
graph that represents the underlying communication network.
There are many approaches in the literature that deal with
identifying motion constraints to maintain network connec-
tivity; see [3] for a detailed survey. Most of these works
involve estimating the second smallest eigenvalue of the
Laplacian matrix while assuming that the agents exchange
information when their inter-agent distance is less than some
prespecified value [4]–[6]. In contrast to these works, the
authors in [7] introduce a measure called the geometric
connectivity robustness, which is then used to determine the
motion constraints. In the aforementioned works, each agent
is assumed to have access to the current positions of its
neighbors. These approaches are not directly applicable to
UUVs because of the unique challenges presented by the
underwater environment, such as extremely low communi-
cation bandwidth and frequent dropouts.
Devaprakash Muniraj and Mazen Farhood are with the Kevin T. Crofton
Department of Aerospace and Ocean Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacks-
burg, VA 24061, USA. Daniel J. Stilwell is with the Bradley Department
of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, VA
24061, USA. Email addresses: devapm@vt.edu, farhood@vt.edu, and stil-
well@vt.edu. This work was supported by the Office of Naval Research
under Award No. N00014-18-1-2627.
978-1-7281-7447-1/20/$31.00 ©2020 IEEE
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on March 20,2023 at 10:57:37 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Different communication protocols, such as time-division
multiple access (TDMA) and code-division multiple access
(CDMA), have been used for UUV networks [8]. In this
work, we assume that the UUVs communicate using the
TDMA protocol, whereby only one UUV is allowed to
communicate at any given time. As a result, the UUVs
do not have access to the present positions and velocities
of their neighbors. Additionally, due to the nature of the
TDMA protocol, there is asymmetry in the information
available to each UUV. With this communication structure,
we present a distributed algorithm that provides connectivity-
preserving motion constraints for each UUV in the network.
Specifically, we consider a homogeneous network of UUVs
with similar communication capabilities and assume planar
motions where the linear and angular speeds of each UUV
are bounded. Each agent i uses information from its neigh-
bors, which includes their past positions and orientations,
to estimate a measure called the geometric connectivity
robustness, denoted by R̂i (t) at time t. Informally, R̂i (t)
represents the maximum distance an agent could move over
a planning horizon [t0 , t0 + Tf ] without losing connectivity
with the network, where t0 > t and Tf is the length of the
planning horizon. The algorithm computes R̂i (t) such that
even if R̂i (t) ≤ 0, agent i could still loiter within a disk
of radius DL without losing connectivity. When an agent
receives information from one of its neighbors, it estimates
the connectivity robustness, which could then be used by the
agent’s motion planner to generate a new plan, if needed.
Although the connectivity maintenance algorithm pro-
posed herein makes use of the notion of geometric connec-
tivity robustness from [7], [9], it differs from these works in
the following respects: i) the agents in the UUV network are
not assumed to have access to the current positions of their
neighbors; ii) the UUVs are not required to replan at the same
time; and iii) when R̂i (t) ≤ 0, the algorithm still guarantees
network connectivity by having agent i loiter within a disk of
some prespecified radius. This paper is organized as follows:
Section II defines some important notions that are used in
the paper; Section III describes the connectivity maintenance
algorithm; Section IV provides results that establish network
connectivity for the proposed algorithm; Section V presents
illustrative simulation results for a UUV network with 4
agents; and Section VI provides some concluding remarks.
II. P RELIMINARIES
A. Notation
The sets of non-negative integers and real vectors of size
m×1 are denoted by N and Rm , respectively. Given a vector
5255
 √
x ∈ Rn , kxk := xT x denotes the Euclidean norm of
x. Xi (t) ∈ R2 and X(t) = [X1 (t)T , . . . , Xn (t)T ]T denote
the position vector of agent i and the concatenated position
vector of all the agents at time t ∈ N, respectively. The
interaction among the UUVs is represented by a proximity
graph, whereby the UUVs form the nodes of the graph and
the communication links between the UUVs constitute the
edges of the graph. Two agents communicate with each
other if their inter-agent distance is less than or equal to
the communication range R. We assume that all the agents
in the network have similar capabilities. A proximity graph
is a dynamic graph, as edges can be added or removed
based on the positions of the agents. To reflect this fact,
we represent the set of edges of a proximity graph as a
function of X(·). A proximity graph with a set of vertices
V and a set of undirected edges E(X(t)) is denoted by
P(X(t)) = (V, E(X(t))). We denote the set of neighbors
of agent i at time t by Ni (t) = {j ∈ V | (i, j) ∈ E(X(t))}.
Given a proximity graph P(X(t)), (v1 , v2 , . . . , vk ) denotes a
path in P(X(t)) if vi ∈ V for i = 1, . . . , k and (vj , vj+1 ) ∈
E(X(t)) for j = 1, . . . , k−1.
B. Geometric Connectivity Robustness
The connectivity maintenance algorithm proposed in this
work makes use of the notion of geometric connectivity
robustness [9], a brief overview of which is provided here.
Consider a network of n agents whose interactions are rep-
resented by the proximity graph P(X(·)). Before explaining
how geometric connectivity robustness is computed for a
network of n agents moving in a 2-D plane, we define the
path robustness for a two-edge path (i, j, k) as given below.
Definition 1: Given a two-edge path (i, j, k) from agent
i to agent k in the proximity graph P(X(t)), its path
robustness P (i, j, k, t) is defined as min{R − kXi (t) −
Xj (t)k, R − kXj (t) − Xk (t)k}.
If P (i, j, k, t) > 0, then agents i and k are connected
through agent j at time t. P (i, j, k, t) represents the max-
imum distance that the agents i, j, and k can move with
respect to each other without breaking the path from i to
k. Path robustness is used to define an agent’s connectivity
robustness as follows.
Definition 2: Given a network of n agents whose interac-
tions are represented by the proximity graph P(X(·)), the
connectivity robustness of agent i at state X(t) is given by
1 maintenance algorithm, and ii) the controller ensures that
Ri (X(t)) = min max P (i, j, k, t). (1)
2 k∈Ni (t) j∈Ni (t)
Ri (X(t)) represents the maximum distance that agent i
could move at time t without breaking connectivity with
any of its neighbors Ni (t). Ri (X(t)) can be computed
in a distributed manner, as it only uses information from
an agent’s neighbors. The following result from [9] relates
connectivity robustness and network connectivity.
Proposition 1: If the proximity graph P(X(t)) is con-
nected and Ri (X(t)) > 0 for all i, then each agent can be dis-
placed arbitrarily by a distance Ri (X(t)) while maintaining
the connectivity of the graph in the displaced configuration.
5256
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on March 20,2023 at 10:57:37 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
III. C ONNECTIVITY M AINTENANCE A LGORITHM
From Proposition 1 and the definitions in the previous
section, we can infer that if the communication graph
P(X(t)) is connected and each agent i moves by a distance
no greater than Ri (X(t)), then each agent i is guaranteed
to maintain connectivity in the new configuration with all
of its neighbors Ni (t) by at most a two-edge path from i.
Thus, a simple connectivity maintenance algorithm can be
devised when each agent has access to the current positions
of all of its neighbors. However, in this work, the agents have
access only to the past positions of their neighbors. In such
a scenario, designing a connectivity maintenance algorithm
that guarantees network connectivity while not being overly
conservative is a challenging task. In the rest of this section,
we describe a connectivity maintenance algorithm for a
UUV network where the agents interact using the TDMA
communication protocol.
A. Communication Protocol
Under the TDMA protocol, each agent is assigned a
time slot to broadcast information to its neighbors. At any
time slot, only one agent is allowed to communicate. The
broadcasted information is received by the agents that are
within the communication range of the broadcasting agent.
We denote the duration of a time slot by δt , and T = nδt
denotes the duration of one cycle of communication between
the agents. Agent i broadcasts information at time instants
(i+k−1)δt for k = ln, where l ∈ N. This information is
received by an agent j if kXj (t)−Xi ((i+k−1)δt )k ≤ R for
all t ∈ [(i+k−1)δt , (i+k)δt ]. Agent j is assumed to receive
the broadcasted information before t = (i + k)δt . Agent i at
time t has information about agent j that was broadcasted
at time t − pj δt , where pj = n − j + mod(t/δt , n) + 1, if
j ≥ mod(t/δt , n)+1, or pj = mod(t/δt , n) + 1 − j, other-
wise. Consequently, we cannot compute the actual con-
nectivity robustness of the agents as in (1) and can only
estimate its value by making certain assumptions on the
dynamical behavior of the UUVs. Specifically, we make
the following assumptions: i) the UUVs in the network
do not travel at speeds greater than V m/s, and ii) the
maximum angular velocity of each UUV is Ω rad/s. Also,
we assume that each UUV has a motion planner and a
controller that accomplish the following tasks: i) the motion
planner generates a dynamically feasible trajectory while
satisfying the motion constraints provided by the connectivity
the UUV tracks the reference trajectory commanded by the
motion planner.
We define some additional terms that are used in the
algorithm. Nir (t) for agent i at time t denotes the set of
agents that have transmitted their information to agent i till
time t. Nir (t) is updated under one of the following two
scenarios: if agent i receives data from an agent that does
not belong to the set Nir (t), then the broadcasting agent is
added to Nir (t), or if the data from one of the agents in
Nir (t) is more than nδt s old, then that agent is removed
from Nir (t). The agents in the set Nir (·) are called the

Fig. 1. Classification of the reachable sets into three different types.
Fig. 2. Bounding convex polygons for the three types of reachable sets.
communication neighbors of agent i. Nic (t) ⊆ Nir (t) for
agent i at time t denotes the subset of agents in Nir (t) that
are used to estimate the connectivity robustness of agent i
at time t. NiF n (t) ⊆ Nic (t) is the set of agents k ∈ Nic (t)
such that (i, k) is the most robust path between agents i and
k as estimated by agent i. The agents in the set NiF n (·)
are referred to as the first-degree neighbors of agent i. The
information broadcasted by an agent i at time t is composed
of its position Xi (t), orientation ψi (t), and the set Nic (t).
B. Algorithm Description
At time t = 0, we assume that P(X(0)) is connected.
We also assume that there is time synchronization among
the UUVs in the network and that there is no clock drift.
To enable information exchange during initialization, we
assume that the agents remain stationary for t ≤ nδt . As
a consequence, Nic ((n−1)δt ) = Nic (nδt ) = Nir ((n−1)δt ).
For t ≥ nδt , each agent estimates its connectivity robustness,
denoted by R̂i (t), using Algorithm 1. The motion planner of
agent i uses R̂i (t) to plan a path that is implemented at time
t+δt . If R̂i (t) ≤ 0, the motion planner commands agent i to
loiter within a disk of radius DL starting from Xi (t + δt ).
When the UUV is loitering, we say that it is in the loiter
phase. When an agent is not in the loiter phase, it is in
the mission phase, where it is executing a plan computed
by the motion planner. For convenience, we assume that
an agents exits the loiter phase at the same position where
it entered. In the loiter phase, instead of broadcasting the
current position and orientation, the agent broadcasts the
position and orientation corresponding to the point of entry
into the loiter phase. Since the connectivity maintenance
algorithm is identical for all the agents, we describe the
algorithm for an arbitrary agent i. The different steps in the
algorithm are explained next.
The inputs to the algorithm are the current position of
agent i, the estimated position of agent i at the next time step
(X̂i (t+δt )), past positions and heading angles of the com-
munication neighbors, the connectivity robustness estimated
at the previous time step, and the set Nir (t). Based on these
inputs, the algorithm estimates the connectivity robustness at
time t and updates the set Nic (t). First, we compute a set
5257
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on March 20,2023 at 10:57:37 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
N̄ based on the data received by agent i, if any, during the
time interval [t − δt , t]. ir and is denote the agents that are
scheduled to broadcast during the time intervals [t − δt , t)
and [t, t + δt ), respectively. If t = nδt (line 6) or if agent
i receives data from one of the agents in the set Nic (t−δt )
(lines 8 and 10), then N̄ = Nic (t). If agent i receives data
from an agent that is not in the set Nic (t−δt ) (lines 12 and
14), then N̄ is computed as in lines 13 to 18. If t > nδt and
no new data is received during the time interval (t − δt , t],
then the estimated connectivity robustness is not updated
(line 50) and Nic (t) is updated using Nir (t) (line 51). If
agent i receives new data during the time interval (t − δt , t],
then agent i determines whether to update its connectivity
robustness based on the computations given in lines 19 to
48, which are explained next.
For an agent k, the set Ñk consists of agents that can be
the potential intermediate agents in the two-edge path (i, j, k)
between agents i and k. The set Ñk is computed in lines 25
and 27 depending on whether or not agent i is broadcasting
during the time interval [t, t + δt ). Algorithm 2 computes
the function getRpath, whose output is the robustness of the
path (i, j, k). To compute the path robustness P̄ (i, j, k, t),
agent i computes the reachable sets of agent j, for j ∈
Ñk , over the time interval [t − pj δt , t+(n+1)δt ]. Based on
our assumption that the agents move in a 2-D plane and
that their angular speeds are bounded by Ω rad/s, we can
compute the reachable set using the equations of motion for
a Dubins vehicle with a maximum speed of V m/s and a
maximum angular speed of Ω rad/s. The reachable sets can
be classified into three different types as shown in Fig. 1.
To account for all possible trajectories of the agents during
the time interval [t + δt , t + (n + 1)δt ], we need to compute
the maximum distance between two such reachable sets.
Recognizing that the reachable sets are non-convex regions
in the 2-D plane, it is computationally expensive to estimate
the maximum distance between the reachable sets and is
not suitable for implementation on a UUV with limited
computational capabilities. To overcome this difficulty, we
approximate the reachable sets by bounding them inside
convex polygons. Once this is accomplished, the maximum
distance between any two convex polygons can be computed
by simply finding the distance between the vertices of the two
polygons and taking the maximum of those distances [10].
Given two polygons with p and q vertices, computing the
maximum distance between them only requires pq oper-
ations. Consequently, in computing the bounding convex
polygons, we must keep the number of vertices to a minimum
while at the same time minimizing the error volume between
the convex polygon and the convexified reachable set.
To compute the bounding convex polygons, we first con-
vexify the non-convex reachable sets. Once the reachable
sets are convexified, we then select the number of vertices of
the bounding polygon bearing in mind the need to minimize
the error volume. We select 5, 7, and 4 as the number of
vertices of the bounding polygons for the reachable sets of
type I, II, and III, respectively. Once the number of vertices
for each polygon is selected, the polygons are computed
 Algorithm 2: getRpath
Algorithm 1: Connectivity maintenance algorithm for agent i
1: Inputs: current time t, agent indices i, j, k, estimated position
1: Inputs: current position (Xi (t)), estimated position at the of agent i at the next time step (X̂i (t + δt )), and past positions
next time step (X̂i (t+δt )), past positions, heading angles, and and heading angles of agents j and k (Xj (t − pj δt ), ψj (t −
the set Njc of the communication neighbors (Xj (t − pj δt ), pj δt ), Xk (t − pk δt ), and ψk (t − pk δt ) for j, k ∈ Nir (t))
ψj (t − pj δt ), and Njc (t − pj δt ) for j ∈ Nir (t)), the estimated 2: Outputs: estimated robustness of path (i, j, k) (P̄ (i, j, k, t))
connectivity robustness at the previous time step R̂i (t − δt ), 3: procedure
and the set Nir (t), where t = lδt for l = n, (n + 1), . . . 4: if j 6= h i(then
2: Outputs: estimated connectivity robustness R̂i (t) and Nic (t) n + is − j if j ≥ is
3: procedure 5: p1 = ; p̄1 = p1 + n + 1
is − j if j < is
4: ir = mod((t − δt )/δt , n) + 1; is = mod(t/δt , n) + 1
6: poly1 = bound poly(p̄1 )
5: if ir ∈ Nir (t) or t = nδt then
6: if t = nδt then 7: poly1r = rotate poly(poly1 , Xj (t−pj δt ), ψj (t−pj δt ))
7: Nic (t) = Nic (t − δt ); N̄ = Nic (t) 8: d¯ij = maxD poly(X̂i (t+δt ), poly1r ) + DL
else if ir ∈ Nic (t − δt ) and i ∈ Nicr (t − δt ) then
(
8: n + is − k if k ≥ is
9: Nic (t) = Nic (t − δt ) ∩ Nir (t); N̄ = Nic (t) 9: p2 = ; p̄2 = p2 + n + 1
is − k if k < is
10: else if ir ∈ Nic (t − δt ) and i ∈ / Nicr (t − δt ) then 10: poly2 = bound poly(p̄2 )
11: Ni (t) = (Ni (t − δt )\{ir }) ∩ Nir (t); N̄ = Nic (t)
c c
11: poly2r = rotate poly(poly2 , Xk (t−pk δt ), ψk (t−pk δt ))
12: else if ir ∈ / Nic (t − δt ) and i ∈ Nicr (t − δt ) then
12: d¯jk = maxD poly(poly1r , poly2r ) + 2DL
13: c
Ni (t)=(Nic (t−δt ) ∪ {ir }) ∩ Nir (t); N̄ = Nic (t)
14: else if ir ∈ / Nic (t − δt ) and i ∈
/ Nicr (t − δt ) then 13: P̄ (i, j, k, t) = min{R − d¯ij , R − d¯jk }
14: else
15: if is == i then (
n + is − k if k ≥ is
16: Nic (t) = Nic (t − δt ) ∩ Nir (t); N̄ = { } 15: p1 = ; p̄1 = p1 + n + 1
is − k if k < is
17: else
18: N̄ = (Nic (t − δt ) ∪ {ir }) ∩ Nir (t) 16: poly1 = bound poly(p̄1 )
19: if N̄ 6= { } then 17: poly1r = rotate poly(poly1 , Xk (t−pk δt ), ψk (t−pk δt ))
20: for k ∈ N̄ do 18: d¯ik = maxD poly(X̂i (t+δt ), poly1r ) + DL
21: if t = nδt then 19: P̄ (i, j, k, t) = R − d¯ik
22: Ñk = { }
23: else if i ∈ Nkc (t − pk δt ) then using a result from [11] that provides conditions for bounding
24: if is == i then a convex set with a convex polygon while minimizing the
25: Ñk = {j | j ∈ N̄ , i ∈ Njc (t − pj δt ), error volume. Using that procedure, we compute the three
k ∈ Njc (t − pj δt ), j ∈ Nkc (t − pk δt )}
bounding convex polygons as given in Fig. 2. Given the
26: else
27: Ñk = {j | j ∈ N̄ , j ∈ Nkc (t − pk δt ), values of V , Ω, and δt , we compute n bounding polygons
k ∈ Njc (t − pj δt )} corresponding to time horizons of length (n+m+1)δt , for
28: else m = 1, 2, . . . , n, using the three types of bounding polygons
29: Ñk = { } shown in Fig. 2. The n bounding polygons are computed a
30: if Ñk 6= { } then priori with the UUV position assumed to be at (0, 0) and
31: for j ∈ Ñk do a heading angle of 0 deg. While the function bound poly
32: P̄ (i, j, k, t) = getRpath(i, j, k, t, X̂i (t+δt )) in Algorithm 2 is used to select the appropriate bounding
33: q̄1 (i, k) = maxj∈Ñk {P̄ (i, j, k, t)} polygon, the function rotate poly is employed to translate the
34: q̄2 (i, k) = getRpath(i, h i, k, t, X̂i (t+δt )) polygon to the UUV position and rotate it by the heading
35: q̄(i, k) = max{q̄1 (i, k), q̄2 (i, k)} angle that were broadcasted.
36: else Although R̄i (t) in line 38 looks similar to the formula
37: q̄(i, k) = getRpath(i, h i, k, t, X̂i (t+δt ))
given in (1), it is different in the following respects. First,
38: R̄i (t) = max(mink∈N̄ {q̄(i, k)} − DL , 0)
since we do not have access to the actual neighbors of
39: if t > nδt and ir ∈ / Nic (t−δt ) and i ∈
/ Nicr (t−δt ) then
agent i at time t, we use the agents in the set N̄ to
40: if is 6= i and R̄i (t) > R̂i (t−δt ) then
estimate R̄i (t). Second, R̄i (t) is computed considering all
41: R̂i (t) = R̄i (t)
possible trajectories of the agents in the set N̄ over the time
42: Nic (t) = N̄
43: else
interval [t, t+(n+1)δt ] rather than just the current position
44: R̂i (t) = R̂i (t − δt ) of the agents as in (1). Third, the factor 1/2 is absent in
45: if is 6= i then line 38, as the motions of the other agents over the time
46: Nic (t) = Nic (t − δt ) ∩ Nir (t) interval [t, t+(n+1)δt ] have already been accounted for in
47: else the computation of q̄(·, ·). Fourth, the term DL in line 38
48: R̂i (t) = R̄i (t) ensures that even if agent i loiters within a disk of radius
49: else DL during the time interval [t+δt , t+(n+1)δt ], it does not
50: R̂i (t) = R̂i (t − δt ) lose connectivity with the agents in N̄ .
51: Nic (t) = Nic (t − δt ) ∩ Nir (t) If t = nδt or the data received by agent i during the time
interval (t − δt , t] is from one of the agents in the set

5258

Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on March 20,2023 at 10:57:37 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 Nic (t − δt ) (line 47), then the estimated robustness at time
t, R̂i (t), is equal to R̄i (t) that is computed in line 38. If
t > nδt and the data received by agent i is not from one
of the agents in Nic (t − δt ) and i ∈ / Nir (t − δt ) (line 39),
then R̂i (t) is updated if R̄i (t) is greater than the estimated
robustness at the previous time step and i is not broadcasting
during the interval [t, t+δt ) (lines 40-42).
IV. P ROVING N ETWORK C ONNECTIVITY
We now show that under the following assumptions on
the initial configuration of the UUVs and the motion planner
and the controller of each UUV, the UUVs maintain network
connectivity under Algorithm 1.
A1. The initial positions of the UUVs are such that the
underlying proximity graph P(X(0)) is connected.
A2. The motion planner of each UUV generates a dynam-
ically feasible trajectory, by which we mean that the
maximum demanded speed and angular speed of the
agent is not greater than V m/s and Ω rad/s, respectively,
such that kXid (t+(j+1)δt )−Xid (t+jδt )k ≤ R̂i (t)/n for
j = 1, . . . , n, where Xid (·) denotes the reference position
commanded by the motion planner. If R̂i (t) ≤ 0, then the
motion planner of agent i commands agent i to loiter
within a disk of radius DL starting from Xid (t + δt ).
A3. Each agent has a controller which ensures that the UUV
tracks the commanded reference trajectory.
With the above assumptions, we prove that Algorithm 1
always guarantees network connectivity. Before proving the
main result, we present some useful lemmas.
Lemma 1: Given k ∈ NiF n (t−δt ) and R̂i (t−δt ) > 0, then
Algorithm 1 guarantees that agents i and k remain connected
over the time interval [t, t + δt ].
Proof: Since R̂i (t−δt ) > 0, agent i is in the mission
phase executing a plan that is implemented at some time t̄,
where t ≥ t̄ ≥ t−(n−1)δt . The plan implemented at t̄ is
computed based on the connectivity robustness estimated at
time t̄−δt . Since k ∈ NiF n (t−δt ) and agent i is executing the
same plan that is implemented at t̄, we have k ∈ NiF n (t̄−δt )
and R̂i (t̄−δt ) = R̂i (t−δt ). Consequently, (i, k) is the most
robust path from i to k and from lines 38 and 18 in
Algorithm 1 and Algorithm 2, respectively, we can write
R − d¯ik ≥ R̂i (t̄−δt ) + DL (2)
where d¯ik = maxD poly(X̂i (t̄), poly1r ) + DL , poly1r =
rotate poly(poly1 , Xk (t̄−(p1 +1)δt ), ψk (t̄−(p1 +1)δt )), and
poly1 = bound poly(p1 +n+1). Recognizing that X̂i (t̄) =
Xi (t̄) from assumption A3, we can rewrite (2) as
maxD poly(X̂i (t̄), poly1r ) ≤ R − R̂i (t̄−δt ) − 2DL .
Since Algorithm 1 computes maxD poly(X̂i (t̄), poly1r ) by
considering all the possible positions of agent k over the
time interval [t̄, t̄+nδt ], under assumptions A2 and A3 and
using the triangle inequality, we can write
kXi (t+δt ) − Xk (t+δt )k ≤ maxD poly(Xi (t̄), poly1r ) +
(t + δt − t̄)R̂i (t̄−δt )/(nδt ) + DL . (4)
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on March 20,2023 at 10:57:37 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Inequality (4) accounts for all three possible scenarios for
agent k over the time interval [t̄ − (p1 +1)δt , t+δt ], namely,
the mission phase, the loiter phase, or a combination thereof.
Noting that t ≥ t̄ ≥ t−(n−1)δt , and from (3) and (4), we get
kXi (t+δt ) − Xk (t+δt )k ≤ R − DL ≤ R. (5)
From (5), we can conclude that agents i and k are connected
at time t+δt . We can write an inequality analogous to (4) for
any time t̃ ∈ [t, t+δt ) and show that i and k are connected
at time t̃, thereby proving the claim.
Next, we present Lemmas 2-7, whose proofs will appear in
the journal version of this paper.
Lemma 2: Given an agent i that implements a new plan
over the time interval [t+δt , t+(n+1)δt ], then for all k ∈
NiF n (t), if k ∈ NiF n (t̄) for all t̄ ∈ [t + δt , t + (n−1)δt ], then
Algorithm 1 guarantees that agents i and k are connected
over the time interval [t + δt , t + (n + 1)δt ].
Lemma 3: Given k ∈ / Nic (t − δt ) and i ∈ / Nkc (t − δt ),
if k ∈ Ni (t), then Algorithm 1 guarantees that i ∈ Nkc (t̄),
c
where t + δt < t̄ ≤ t + nδt .
Lemma 4: Given an agent i that implements a new plan
over the time interval [t + δt , t + (n + 1)δt ], if agent i does
not replan during the time interval [t+δt , t+(n+1)δt ], then,
for all k ∈ Nic (t) and k ∈ / NiF n (t), there exists j ∈ Nic (t)
such that the following hold:
1) During the time interval [t + δt , t + (n + 1)δt ], agents
i and j are connected and agents j and k are connected;
2) j ∈ Nkc (t̂), k ∈ Njc (t̂), and j ∈ Nic (t̂) for all
t̂ ∈ [t + δt , t + (n+1)δt ];
3) j ∈ Nic (t̄) for all t̄ ∈ [t̃, t + (n+1)δt ], where t + δt ≤
t̃ ≤ t + nδt .
Lemma 5: Given k ∈ Nic (t), k ∈ / Nic (t+δt ), and agent i
is in the mission phase during the time interval [t, t+δt ], then
Algorithm 1 guarantees that there exists j ∈ Nic (t) such that
j ∈ Nkc (t̃), k ∈ Njc (t̃), and j ∈ Nic (t̃) for all t̃ ∈ [t, t + δt ],
and i ∈ Njc (t̄) for some t̄ ≥ t + δt with agents i and j being
connected during the time interval [t, t̄+δt ].
Lemma 6: Given k ∈ Nic (t), k ∈ / Nic (t+δt ), and agents i
and k are in the loiter phase and the mission phase, respec-
tively, during the time interval [t, t+δt ], then Algorithm 1
guarantees that there exists j ∈ Nic (t) such that j ∈ Nkc (t̃),
i ∈ Njc (t̃), and j ∈ Nic (t̃) for all t̃ ∈ [t, t+δt ], and k ∈ Njc (t̄)
for some t̄ ≥ t + δt with agents j and k being connected
during the time interval [t, t̄+δt ].
Lemma 7: Given k ∈ Nic (t), k ∈ / Nic (t+δt ), and agents i
and k are in the loiter phase during the time interval [t, t+δt ],
then Algorithm 1 guarantees that there exists a sequence
of agents j1 , . . . , jm , where 1 ≤ m ≤ n−2, such that the
(3)
following hold:
1) The agent pairs (i, j1 ), (j1 , j2 ), . . . , (jm , k) are con-
nected during the time interval [t, t+δt ];
2) j1 ∈ Nic (t̃) and jm ∈ Nkc (t̃) for all t̃ ∈ [t, t + δt ];
3) For any agent pair (jp , jp+1 ), where p = 0, 1, . . . , m,
j0 = i, and jm+1 = k , jp ∈ Njcp+1 (t̄p ) and jp+1 ∈
Njcp (t̄p ) for some t̄p ≥ t + δt with agents jp and jp+1
being connected during the time interval [t, t̄p + δt ].
5259
 Theorem 1: Given k ∈ Nic (nδt ) and the assumptions A1-
A3, then Algorithm 1 guarantees that agents i and k are
connected for all t ≥ nδt .
Proof: From assumption A1 and the initial conditions
of Algorithm 1, we have k ∈ NiF n (nδt ), i ∈ NkF n (nδt ), and
agents i and k are connected over the interval [nδt , (n+1)δt ].
Agents i and k implement their plan at time t = (n+1)δt ,
and from Lemma 2, they are guaranteed to be connected
over the time interval [(n+1)δt , (2n+1)δt ] if they do not
replan during [(n+1)δt , 2nδt ]. If one of the agents, say
agent i, replans and implements a new plan at some
time t̄ ∈ [(n+2)δt , (2n+1)δt ], then depending on whether
k ∈ NiF n (t̄) or k ∈ / NiF n (t̄), Lemma 2 and Lemma 4, re-
spectively, can be used to show connectivity over the time
interval [t̄, t̄+nδt ]. This reasoning can be extended, and using
Lemmas 5-7, we can show that at any time t ≥ nδt , there
exists a sequence of agents j0 , . . . , jm , where 0 ≤ m ≤ n−2
with j0 = i, such that the agent pairs (j0 , j1 ), (j1 , j2 ), . . . ,
(jm , k) are connected at time t, thereby proving connectivity
between agents i and k at time t.
Theorem 2: Given assumptions A1-A3, then Algorithm 1
guarantees that at any time t > 0, the network represented
by the proximity graph P(X(t)) is connected.
Proof: Since P(X(0)) is connected by assumption A1,
there exists a path in P(X(0)) between any two agents i
and k. From the initial conditions, it is trivial to show that
P(X(t)) is connected for t ∈ [0, (n+1)δt ]. Let (l0 , . . . , lp )
be the path in P(X(nδt )) between two arbitrary agents i and
k, where l0 = i, lp = k, and p ≤ (n − 1). From the initial
conditions, we know that for any pair (lm , lm+1 ), where
0 ≤ m ≤ p − 1, lm ∈ Nlcm+1 (nδt ) and lm+1 ∈ Nlcm (nδt ).
Then, using Theorem 1, we can conclude that lm and lm+1
are connected at any time t > nδt , thereby maintaining the
connectivity between agents i and k at any time t > nδt .
V. S IMULATION R ESULTS
This section presents simulation results with the connec-
tivity maintenance algorithm for a UUV network composed
of 4 UUVs. The UUVs communicate with each other using
the TDMA protocol, where the duration of one time slot
is 10 s. The maximum speed and angular speed of each
UUV are 1.5 m/s and 0.15 rad/s, respectively. The value
of DL , which is the radius of the disk within which the
UUVs loiter if R̂i (·) ≤ 0, is 10 m. The communication range
of the agents, R, is 200 m. Given the motion constraints
from Algorithm 1, a simple motion planner is used to
generate a dynamically feasible trajectory. For this simulation
study, the motion planner generates a dynamically feasible
trajectory by first non-deterministically selecting a value for
the angular speed that is less than or equal to 0.15 rad/s.
By assuming a constant angular speed over the planning
horizon, the motion planner then generates a plan satisfying
the motion constraints. For the sake of demonstration, we
assume that each UUV executes its plan without any position
errors. To analyze the connectivity of the UUV network, we
compute λ2 (L), which is the second smallest eigenvalue of
5260
Authorized licensed use limited to: INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY MADRAS. Downloaded on March 20,2023 at 10:57:37 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
Fig. 3. Time history of the estimated connectivity robustness and the
algebraic connectivity (λ2 (L)) for the 4-agent UUV network.
the Laplacian matrix L. A well-known result in graph theory
states that if λ2 (L) > 0, then the graph is connected [12].
Fig. 3 shows the time histories of R̂i and λ2 (L) for i =
1, . . . , 4 from a representative simulation. It can be seen from
the figure that λ2 (L) is never equal to zero, indicating that
network connectivity is maintained at all times.
VI. C ONCLUSION
This paper presents a distributed connectivity maintenance
algorithm for a network of UUVs that interact using the
TDMA communication protocol. The algorithm provides
motion constraints, which can be used by any motion planner
to generate a connectivity-preserving reference trajectory.
Under appropriate assumptions on the initial configuration,
the motion planner, and the controller of each UUV, we prove
that the proposed algorithm guarantees network connectivity.
Finally, simulation results are presented for a 4-agent UUV
network to show the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm.
R EFERENCES
[1] “The Navy unmanned undersea vehicle (UUV) master plan,” US Navy,
vol. 9, p. 90, 2004.
[2] M. L. Seto, Marine robot autonomy. Springer, 2012.
[3] M. M. Zavlanos, M. B. Egerstedt, and G. J. Pappas, “Graph-theoretic
connectivity control of mobile robot networks,” Proc. IEEE, vol. 99,
no. 9, pp. 1525–1540, 2011.
[4] L. Sabattini, N. Chopra, and C. Secchi, “Decentralized connectivity
maintenance for cooperative control of mobile robotic systems,” Int.
J. Robot. Res., vol. 32, no. 12, pp. 1411–1423, 2013.
[5] M. C. De Gennaro and A. Jadbabaie, “Decentralized control of
connectivity for multi-agent systems,” in Proc. Conf. Decis. Control,
2006, pp. 3628–3633.
[6] P. Yang, R. A. Freeman, G. J. Gordon, K. M. Lynch, S. S. Srinivasa,
and R. Sukthankar, “Decentralized estimation and control of graph
connectivity for mobile sensor networks,” Automatica, vol. 46, no. 2,
pp. 390–396, 2010.
[7] D. P. Spanos and R. M. Murray, “Motion planning with wireless
network constraints,” in Proc. Am. Control Conf., 2005, pp. 87–92.
[8] J. Heidemann, M. Stojanovic, and M. Zorzi, “Underwater sensor
networks: applications, advances and challenges,” Philos. Trans. R.
Soc. A, vol. 370, no. 1958, pp. 158–175, 2012.
[9] D. P. Spanos and R. M. Murray, “Robust connectivity of networked
vehicles,” in Proc. Conf. Decis. Control, vol. 3, 2004, pp. 2893–2898.
[10] H. Edelsbrunner, “Computing the extreme distances between two
convex polygons,” J. Algorithms, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 213–224, 1985.
[11] E. Trost, “Über eine extremalaufgabe,” Nieuw Archief voor Wiskunde,
vol. 2, pp. 1–3, 1949.
[12] M. Fiedler, “Algebraic connectivity of graphs,” Czech. Math. J.,
vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 298–305, 1973.