1: \begin{abstract}

2: 	% Introduction to problem and motivation

3: 	In \acrlong{er} a population of solutions is evolved to optimize robots

4: 	that solve a given task. However, in traditional \acrlong{ea}s, the

5: 	population of solutions tends to converge to local optima when the

6: 	problem is complex or the search space is large, a problem known as

7: 	premature convergence. \Acrlong{qd} algorithms try to overcome premature

8: 	convergence by introducing additional measures that reward solutions for

9: 	being different while not necessarily performing better.

10: 	% Our results:

11: 	In this paper we compare a single objective \acrlong{ea} with two

12: 	diversity promoting search algorithms; a \acrlong{moea} and

13: 	\acrshort{map-elites} a \acrlong{qd} algorithm, for the difficult

14: 	problem of evolving control and morphology in modular robotics. We

15: 	compare their ability to produce high performing solutions, in addition

16: 	to analyze the evolved morphological diversity.

17: 	% Conclusion of the paper:

18: 	The results show that all three search algorithms are capable of

19: 	evolving high performing individuals. However, the \acrlong{qd}

20: 	algorithm is better adept at filling all niches with high-performing

21: 	solutions. This confirms that \acrlong{qd} algorithms are well suited

22: 	for evolving modular robots and can be an important means of generating

23: 	repertoires of high performing solutions that can be exploited both at

24: 	design- and runtime.

25: \end{abstract}

26: