Subject:
|
Re: Idea for a competition
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 8 Dec 2005 20:32:47 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Ignacio Martinez Vazquez <[ignamv@]nospam[gmail.com]>
|
Viewed:
|
1145 times
|
| |
|
|
Nice! I specially like the ball trading part. I wanted bots to modify
each other's IDs so they could label them, in their own way, as
scammers. However, it gets complicated, and it loses some of the fun
because of it.
I visited the link on some LUG's competition, and I really liked it.
By the way, are homebrew light/rotation sensors allowed? I made my own
to avoid buying $$ lego ones.
On 12/8/05, danny staple <orionrobots@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Interesting - this made me think of a Richard Dawkins passage on
> altruism and trickery. It would be who is the best cheat, vs who is
> the best recognition of a cheat, but only once you get past the
> initial stage of the basics. Could the strings merely be a bunch of
> long non friction pins on a small beam with some kind of guide rail.
> Detection of these would be through a touch sensor, and a simple motor
> clutch system could be used to set/reset these bits. This is your
> alterable card system.
>
> I am still a little hazy - awhy do they modify each others cards - I
> am not entirely sure what the cards are about. If the cards are about
> identity, the easier way would be to keep a list of IDs, and
> properties associated with them internally. This also means differenet
> bots may end up with a different perception of the system depending on
> their encounters. The IDs are simply IR transmitted. This is easy if
> you start off with a known number of bots. It sounds like something
> easier to do with BrickOS or some other system than RCX code/NQC as
> the easiest way to store properties would be in full structs.
>
> I may have completely missed what you meant, but these were my
> thoughts on the system. An easy thing to trade, and something the
> community have a lot of experience with the control and movement of,
> would be Lego footballs/basket balls. I think all the GBC fun might
> aid that.
>
> --
> Danny Staple MBCS
> OrionRobots
> http://orionrobots.co.uk
> (Full contact details available through website)
>
>
> On 08/12/05, Ignacio Martinez Vazquez <ignamv@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi,
> > Here's an idea for a competition. Unfortunately, it requires several robots,
> > meaning you either need to have several RCX/board of choice, or know someone
> > who
> > does robots.
> > There's an area, delimited by a line, in which the bots (more than 2) wander
> > around until they recognize another one. Then, they read a color strip (like
> > <http://www.philohome.com/cardreader2/cardreader.htm>) and decide whether to
> > separate, or continue. If they continue, they trade something. Based on some
> > criteria, they may decide not to give the other one the 'thing' (meaning
> > they
> > trick the other into giving away a thing). Each bot has several of them.
> > However, after finishing the trade, they modify each other's cards. If
> > programmed to associate certain sequences with bots who give or scam, they
> > become more likely to earn things.
> > Problems:
> > * Cards would be a total bitch to read and, most of all, modify. They could
> > be
> > transmitted and received through IR, making it easier.
> > * Trading would also be hard. A simple mechanism would be necessary, since
> > probably 2 motors are being used to drive. Maybe the things could be technic
> > 1x2
> > bricks, held on axles. However, aligning axles and actually pushing the
> > bricks
> > would be hard.
> > * Kinda boring, specially if someone didn't plan to recognize scammers and
> > runs
> > out of bricks at the beginning.
> > I guess IR could be used so that, when 2 bots are pointing at each other,
> > they
> > both receive each other's cards. That way, if they both want to trade, they
> > just
> > go straight on. Otherwise, they look away. You'd have to make sure one bot
> > isn't
> > getting messages from more than 1 other at the time.
> > I know it's not great, but I just thought it up...
>
>
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Idea for a competition
|
| Interesting - this made me think of a Richard Dawkins passage on altruism and trickery. It would be who is the best cheat, vs who is the best recognition of a cheat, but only once you get past the initial stage of the basics. Could the strings (...) (19 years ago, 8-Dec-05, to lugnet.robotics)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
