Previous Article in Journal
Dynamic Space Debris Removal via Deep Feature Extraction and Trajectory Prediction in Robotic Systems
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

Experimental Comparative Analysis of Centralized vs. Decentralized Coordination of Aerial–Ground Robotic Teams for Agricultural Operations

by
Dimitris Katikaridis
1,2,3,
Lefteris Benos
1,*,
Patrizia Busato
4,
Dimitrios Kateris
1,
Elpiniki Papageorgiou
5,
George Karras
2 and
Dionysis Bochtis
1,3
1
Institute for Bio-Economy and Agri-Technology (IBO), Centre of Research and Technology-Hellas (CERTH), 6th km Charilaou-Thermi Rd., 57001 Thessaloniki, Greece
2
Department of Informatics and Telecommunications, University of Thessaly, 35131 Lamia, Greece
3
Farmb Digital Agriculture S.A., Dekatis Evdomis (17th) Noemvriou 79, 55534 Thessaloniki, Greece
4
Interuniversity Department of Regional and Urban Studies and Planning (DIST), Polytechnic of Turin, Viale Pier Andrea Mattioli 39, 10125 Torino, Italy
5
Department of Energy Systems, University of Thessaly, Gaiopolis Campus, 41500 Larisa, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Robotics 2025, 14(9), 119; https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics14090119
Submission received: 23 July 2025 / Revised: 20 August 2025 / Accepted: 27 August 2025 / Published: 28 August 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Smart Agriculture with AI and Robotics)

Abstract

Reliable and fast communication between unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) and unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs) is essential for effective coordination in agricultural settings, particularly when human involvement is part of the system. This study systematically compares two communication architectures representing centralized and decentralized communication frameworks: (a) MAVLink (decentralized) and (b) Farm Management Information System (FMIS) (centralized). Field experiments were conducted in both empty field and orchard environments, using a rotary UAV for worker detection and a UGV responding to intent signaled through color-coded hats. Across 120 trials, the system performance was assessed in terms of communication reliability, latency, energy consumption, and responsiveness. FMIS consistently demonstrated higher message delivery success rates (97% in both environments) than MAVLink (83% in the empty field and 70% in the orchard). However, it resulted in higher UGV resource usage. Conversely, MAVLink achieved reduced UGV power draw and lower latency, but it was more affected by obstructed settings and also resulted in increased UAV battery consumption. In conclusion, MAVLink is suitable for time-sensitive operations that require rapid feedback, while FMIS is better suited for tasks that demand reliable communication in complex agricultural environments. Consequently, the selection between MAVLink and FMIS should be guided by the specific mission goals and environmental conditions.
Keywords: digital agriculture; agri-robotics; FMIS; multi-robot collaboration; human–machine interaction digital agriculture; agri-robotics; FMIS; multi-robot collaboration; human–machine interaction

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Katikaridis, D.; Benos, L.; Busato, P.; Kateris, D.; Papageorgiou, E.; Karras, G.; Bochtis, D. Experimental Comparative Analysis of Centralized vs. Decentralized Coordination of Aerial–Ground Robotic Teams for Agricultural Operations. Robotics 2025, 14, 119. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics14090119

AMA Style

Katikaridis D, Benos L, Busato P, Kateris D, Papageorgiou E, Karras G, Bochtis D. Experimental Comparative Analysis of Centralized vs. Decentralized Coordination of Aerial–Ground Robotic Teams for Agricultural Operations. Robotics. 2025; 14(9):119. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics14090119

Chicago/Turabian Style

Katikaridis, Dimitris, Lefteris Benos, Patrizia Busato, Dimitrios Kateris, Elpiniki Papageorgiou, George Karras, and Dionysis Bochtis. 2025. "Experimental Comparative Analysis of Centralized vs. Decentralized Coordination of Aerial–Ground Robotic Teams for Agricultural Operations" Robotics 14, no. 9: 119. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics14090119

APA Style

Katikaridis, D., Benos, L., Busato, P., Kateris, D., Papageorgiou, E., Karras, G., & Bochtis, D. (2025). Experimental Comparative Analysis of Centralized vs. Decentralized Coordination of Aerial–Ground Robotic Teams for Agricultural Operations. Robotics, 14(9), 119. https://doi.org/10.3390/robotics14090119

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop