1: \begin{proof}

2: % \ga{Visual Proof? Do we need a proof, and do we even need this proposition?}

3: 

4: % \begin{figure}[!h]

5: % \includegraphics[width=2.81cm, height=5cm]{figures/potential_fields/info_invar/potential_navigation_2ndinfo_invar20_num_robots_6.png}

6: % \includegraphics[width=2.81cm, height=5cm]{figures/potential_fields/info_invar/potential_navigation_2ndinfo_invar210_num_robots_6.png}

7: % \includegraphics[width=2.81cm, height=5cm]{figures/potential_fields/info_invar/potential_navigation_2ndinfo_invar470_num_robots_6.png}

8: % \caption{Potential Fields Navigation Calibration 1}

9: % \label{potentialinvar1}

10: % \end{figure}

11: 

12: % \begin{figure}[!h]

13: % \includegraphics[width=2.81cm, height=5cm]{figures/potential_fields/info_invar/potential_navigation_info_invar20_num_robots_6.png}

14: % \includegraphics[width=2.81cm, height=5cm]{figures/potential_fields/info_invar/potential_navigation_info_invar210_num_robots_6.png}

15: % \includegraphics[width=2.81cm, height=5cm]{figures/potential_fields/info_invar/potential_navigation_info_invar490_num_robots_6.png}

16: % \caption{Potential Fields Navigation Calibration 2}

17: % \label{potentialinvar2}

18: % \end{figure}

19: 

20: % It can be seen in the first calibration scenario of figure \ref{potentialinvar1}, that no robot is guaranteed to not have to sense an obstacle. In the second calibration scenario of figure \ref{potentialinvar2}, the middle robot is guaranteed to never have to sense an obstacle due to it being surrounded by all other robots. This property is forward invariant, because the potential fields algorithm guarantees that the graph topology will be maintained from when it is formed until the end of the program.

21: 

22: % \ga{This proof could be made more mathematically rigorous, but is it necessary?}

23: % \end{proof}

24: