Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #01980
To: Sean Rigter rigter@cafe.net
From: Steven Bolt sbolt@xs4all.nl
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 1999 10:14:17 +0200 (CEST)
Subject: [alt-beam] Better 74HC design WAS opamp SE's, RE:74HC240 (fwd)
--8323584-533687598-923040766=:1375
content-id:
content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Btw, this is what the SunEater_IV in SunEater_V looks like at the
moment. The 74HC14 has two STinverters left, just enough to realize
the `eyes', tactile sensors and motor control. I need to squeeze it
all in one IC to meet small & light target. The adjustables may be
replaced by fixed resistors when the little guy is behaving
properly. Still have to do the layout. Wish I had more time...
----------------------------------------------------------------------
# sbolt@xs4all.nl # Steven Bolt # popular science monthly KIJK #
----------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
--8323584-533687598-923040766=:1375
Attachment: SunEater_IV.V.gif
--8323584-533687598-923040766=:1375--
1981 Fri, 02 Apr 1999 20:18:29 +1200 [alt-beam] Re: Socer bots/ Hive behaviour beam@corp.sgi.com Justin > > The sum of the competiting input now results in teamwork:
> > Should the ball be in the hands of a fellow player
>
> Deciding if it is a fellow player is higher order decision making
No it isn't. As I said, we have three proximity systems, a seperate one
for each team and the ball. Each system has sensors that result in a
change in resistance or increase in current or something like that at
the appropriate output.
Pretend for a minute that the bots are controlled with a bicore system
or something like that (for simplicity's sake, let's say two bicores -
one for forwards-backwards, one for left-right, whatever)
Wire the ball and opposition sensor outputs together in series with each
other and a diode, with the fellow-player sensor in parralell with the
opposite diode. Do the same to other 3 sensor banks, and wire them to
the bicore.
Simple. No higher order decision making necessary. The wiring does the
math, and the bicore compares the results.
> > the team spreads out, but with a tendancy to mark opposing players
>
> Wow that is really hard to do even for humans they must now keep track
> of the ball and all of their team mates and all of their oppoinents
That's because we do via higher order processing. If the sensors on the
left detect more fellow player than ball (ie resistance in one direction
is lower than in the other), the bicore will make the bot move to the
right. No intelligence neccesary.
> >, and a tendancy to stay resonably near the ball,
>
> Very high reasoning involved how should it decide when it is too close
> or to far from and opposing player or ball
Rubbish. Think of the poppy planet thought-experiment (I think it might
be a different flower, actually, but let's use poppys :-)
A planet is populated with two species of poppy, one is black, one is
white. The black one absorb more light/heat, and so can survive at a
lower temperature than the white ones, which reflect light, and so can
survive at a higher temperature.
If the sun gets colder (eliptical orbit or whatever), the white poppys
mostly die and the black ones are the dominant color, resulting in a
dark grey planet.
This dark planet thus absorbs much more heat than it otherwise would,
and warms up a bit. Conversely, should the sun get hotter, the white
poppys flourish and keep it cool.
Thus the planet temperature is maintained.
Is there very high reasoning involved in how should it decide when it is
too hot or too cold in order to correct and stabalise at the desired
colour (distance from player)? No. Your body is absolutely peppered with
these non-intelligent self-correcting systems.
> The requirement of the CPU is because many of the reasoning aspects you
> suggest just can not be efficiently done hard wired plus we would like
> the bots to react to and adapt to the opposition yes.
The system I described would do all of these things, it would arguably
be more efficient than a CPU solution, and because it results in a
chaotic system (lots of bots, each with multiple bicores, all moving and
influencing the movement of all the others), you will get teamwork,
reaction to opposition, and seemingly random ploys. (Adaption, in the
sense that I would use it, would be lacking from both CPU or BEAM based
systems, unless they were made more complex than the basics needed for a
game of soccer, and as long as this is a philisophical discussion,
working with the minimum requirements seems best).
> So this brings me back to my initial conjecture that "BEAM bots may be
> able to work towards a collective goal but this is not team work" Team
> work requires communication and anticipation of team mates and
> opponents. To quote the great one "Don't go to where the puck is go to
> where it's going to be." Wayne Gretzkey
You are confusing teamwork with good teamwork. Since when was
anticipation a _neccessary_ condition for teamwork?
As with anticipation, _good_ teamwork requires communication, but I'm
not sure communication is actually _required_. It's not especially
relevant however, as even the BEAM idea I talked about involves
communication (in that they broadcast their positions to each other.
Admittedly a very broad concept of communication :-).
> Wayne is one of the best team players out there because of his ability
> to anticipate his team members moves and how his opposition will react
> to them. This is not beam. Beam boils down to neurons firing and a
> result occurring.
How is this relevant? We already know that a human player with thousands
upon billions more processing power than a robot will be able to
approach the problem at a higher level. It doesn't tell us whether or
not BEAM robots can act as a team, only that a human has the potential
to be better at it.
> Stimulus response this is what higher reasoning is
> based on but with no memory and no ability to change BEAM bots can not
> act as a team.
A lot of people consider ants to be one of the epitomes of teamwork and
they don't do it via memory. Pheremone stimulas-response is a big part
of it.
I think it's fairly safe to say that your statement above is simply
mistaken. I certainly can't see why memory would be a requirement for
true teamwork.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
Home