|
[DPRG] Rules
Subject: [DPRG] Rules
From: Mike McCarty
jmccarty at ssd.usa.alcatel.com
Date: Tue Sep 11 11:29:00 CDT 2001
On Mon, 10 Sep 2001, Ed Okerson wrote:
> Yes it does say that,
>
>
> "After leaving area A (not before) the robot may "locate" soda cans. Soda
> can recognition may be indicated by blinks, beeps, etc. Robots that
> mistakenly locate cans will incur a negative "False recognition" score. The
> robot must be within approximately 1' of a can to locate it. This proximity
> is required for the judges to distinguish correct can location versus false
> recognition."
Note the distinction between the words "may" on the one hand, and
"must" or "shall" on the other. As I read this, there is no requirement
for a robot to indicate it has located a can, or even for it to attempt
to locate a can, other than by retrieving it. In fact, it might be
detrimental for a robot to attempt to signal location, as the only
possible benefit occurs when a can is located, but not retrieved (one
gets some points), but there is a definite penalty for a false
recognition.
> But in the next paragraph it also says:
>
> "Cans that are retrieved are automatically counted as being correctly
> located."
It seems to me that this specifically addresses the issue of robots
which do not signal location except via retrieval.
In fact, one possible plan for a robot to succeed under these rules is
for it to have telescopic, or jointed arms, and a narrow profile, with
a "cow catcher" or other plow like device on the front. It moves a
predetermined distance, hopefully beyond all cans, and then extends the
arms, which form a V, and returns hoping to scoop up cans. IOW, the
robot, with the front on the right, looks like this on the way out
|>
and with the front on the left like this on the way back
\
><|
/
The robot could make several sweeps of the area.
> That is why I asked the group for clarification on the rule. When I am
> judging, I want to make sure my understanding of the rules is the same as
> everyone else's. I would be happy if, for future contests, that line were
> deleted from the rules. I do not think scoopers should get location points.
> Only locating and indicating that you have located a can should get those
> points. Locating and retrieving are two separate things and should be kept
> separate. At least that is my opinion. I also would understand the rules
> that you do not have to retrieve a can to get the locating points.
>
> Ed Okerson
I'm not attempting to say what the rules ought to mean, just what they
seem to say.
On another note, do the rules permit robots to retrieve cans by
crushing them and stacking them in a bin on its back? Sounds ambitious,
but at least one would no longer have to worry about round surfaces,
and cans "escaping" after being "caught".
Mike
More information about the DPRG mailing list
|
