Subject:
|
Re: [rtlToronto] rtlToronto20 Draft Rules Posted
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Wed, 23 Nov 2005 23:10:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
735 times
|
| |
|
|
Never answer an email when you're pissed off.
Hey Calum, hows it going?
Calum Tsang wrote:
> In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Derek Raycraft <derek@djr.ca> wrote:
> Right, but not everyone can build a robot that can transfer bricks while moving.
> The goal of the ruleset, especially in this contest, is to define an environment
> in which the most basic interaction, transferring a block while the receiver is
> stopped, can be executed.
I'm not saying you have to, I'm just saying if you can it improves your
chances of transferring blocks to more robots.
> I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, that transferring a block while moving
> is HARDER than transferring a block to a stopped robot. Hence, I need to define
> the rules to support easier one so everyone can play at a baseline. Your
> competitive advantage can derived on your own above that.
Ok, but what I'm saying is your rule to make things "easier" does little
to actually make it easier for everyone, and excludes what is otherwise
a valid strategy. It's my position that you are limiting the game with
a rule that adds little or no value to making the game easier to play.
> > Its not difficult to tell if a source is moving. Detect light, stop,
> > wait a sec, detect light again, it stationary, if it's gone, it
> > moving. And this is just one of many ways of doing it.
> >
> > It is quite possible to be able to chase a moving light. As I said
> > above I'm planning to be able to do that.
>
>
> If you believe Chris, he thinks we'll have ten robots in the field. Assuming
> you are surrounded by ten light sources, your method listed above would result
> in a robot spasming in the middle of the field, unsure of which "moved" light
> source to track.
Could you explain why this would happen. Even Chris's sample robots
wouldn't do this.
> > -a robot that can't follow a moving light spots a light and goes
> > after it, if that robot turns off the light and moves away the robot
> > looses its quarry.
> > -a robot that can follow a moving light spots a light and goes after
> > it, if that robot turns off the light and moves away the robot looses
> > its quarry.
> > -a robot that can't follow a moving light spots a light and goes
> > after it, if that robot leaves it's light on and moves away the robot
> > looses its quarry.
> > -a robot that can follow a moving light spots a light and goes after
> > it, if that robot leaves it's light on and moves away the robot can
> > follow it's quarry.
> >
> > There are more cases of robots finding each other when the light is
> > left on then if it's turned off. Light always on or turned off makes
> > no difference for the non-tracking robot.
>
>
> Right, but you chose the entire set of cases which have the robot turning off
> it's light and moving away. You forgot the entire, basic set of cases where the
> robot keeps its light on and stays put.
Ok...
a robot that can't follow a moving light spots a light and goes after
it, if that robot leaves it's light on and stays were it is the robot
can find it's quarry.
a robot that can follow a moving light spots a light and goes after it,
if that robot leaves it's light on and stays where it is the robot can
find it's quarry.
but I thought that was obvious, so I left it out.
No change for the non light follow robot, one additional opportunity for
the light following robot if the light is left on all the time.
> That's a self serving set of advanced cases: Of course turning the light on
> helps a robot which can track. I disagree that the always turned on light
> doesn't make a difference for a nontracking robot, I would in fact suggest the
> "dumb" robot would get confused.
What exactly is going to confuse the "dumb" robot. Give me the scenario
and why it's confusing. I've run through a full set of example cases
showing no difference for the "dumb" robot whether you turn the light
off or leave it on all the time.
> > This also brings up issues of moving around quickly or slowly. In
> > the time scale of Lego electronics if you move around quickly you are
> > effectively turning the light off because nothing will be able to
> > follow you. If you move around slowly then there's a chance someone
> > can mate with you while your moving, so long as you can keep your
> > light on.
>
>
> I can see the light moving around not showing up on a poorly built light
> "scanner". But I can also see this also confusing the crap out of a basic
> robot.
What exactly is confusing to the basic robot? You keep saying this but
you never explain it.
Taking Chris's basic robot:
-spin around and record light readings and their directions
-spin back to that direction
-if light is still there head towards it.
-if you find the robot in a reasonable distance do your transfer thing
-if not spin again.
-if light is gone move to next highest light reading.
light could be gone because it moved, light could be gone because it
turned off and moved or light could still be there.
To complex for you?
-spin around and record the highest light reading
-spin back to that direction
-if light still there head towards it.
-if you find the robot in a reasonable distance do your transfer thing
-if not spin again.
-if light is gone spin again.
light could be gone because it moved, light could be gone because it
turned off and moved or light could still be there.
To complex for you?
-spin around and stop when your light reading crosses a threshold.
-head towards that light.
-if you find the robot in a reasonable distance do your transfer thing
-if not spin again.
Now the transfer thing is way more complex then this, but at least you
can find the robot regardless of whether the light is turned off when
moving or not.
Now there is a greater chance of false positives if the light is on all
the time. But I don't believe it's going to be significant.
Also don't forget there is going to be at least one light sensor on
every robot. And every light sensor has a nice red light perfectly
tuned for the sensor to pick up. You are going to have to account for
moving lights whether you like it or not.
Also even with 10 robots in the arena you're not going to be able to see
every robot at once. Initially yes, but onces they start milling about
there's not going to be a lot of them in view because they will be
blocked by other robots. I foresee this being a very close contact
game, it's to everyone's advantage to be able to slip by each other
easily. But that's another story.
Derek
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
30 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
