|
[DPRG] Can-Can Rules
Subject: [DPRG] Can-Can Rules
From: David P. Anderson
dpa at io.isem.smu.edu
Date: Tue Sep 11 23:19:33 CDT 2001
Howdy
Exactly right. Precisely the reason that folks need real-world
challenges instead of artificial contests.
Case in point, the Trinity Robotic Fire-fighting Contest. A clever
(or as some would say "lazy") fellow figured out early on that his
robot could win the contest by remaining motionless at the starting
point and flooding the space with CO2 gas. In the real-world that
would be a laudable and elegant solution.
But he was not rewarded for his cleverness/lazyness. He was condemned,
and the rules were changed to guarantee that other presumptuous clever/
lazy folks couldn't repeat his blatant act of un-bridled creativity.
Robot contests, all contests really, tend to punish real-world solutions
and reward artificial ones. Hence they are generally not a good pathway
to real-world robotics. So it seems to me.
regards,
dpa
> Rodent wrote:
>
> The lazy guy is always gonna find the simplest way to do things. Maybe not
> the most elegant, but it gets the job done.
>
> With this in mind, who deserves the better score? The guy who builds this
> super-exotic articulated arm with 10 motors that picks up a can with
> surgical precision, or the guy who figures out how to do it all with one
> motor and materials scavenged from the neighbor's trash?
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
>
> > I agree most heartily with David's assessment that robot contests distract
> us to
> > the entertainment business instead of the practice of science. Toys are
> nice
> > but real world engineering is more fun .......to an engineer.
More information about the DPRG mailing list
|
