Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #02292
To: Richard Piotter richfile@rconnect.com, beam beam@corp.sgi.com
From: Dennison dennlill@buffnet.net
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 1999 17:05:14 -0400
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: Spyder VII
Ah, but you lose all the benifits that the branched microcore gave you.
Think about it, now all the legs are linked, sure they share the same pulse,
but not nessesarilly the same pulse duration. And they don't alway share.
Your design eliminates the nets ability to stabalize the robot frame. The
machine also wouldn't be able to accomplish anything very cool, or as cool.
IE: it wouldn't be able to turn, or change gait, etc... Simply becuase their
all linked.
Its simplified, sure but you lose alot in the simplification.
Dennison
>I have an interesting variation on the microcore and specificly, the
>branching microcore of Tilden's own Microcore Spyder. I've taken the
>original from 16 neurons to 7!!! I noticed many Nvs shared the same
>pulse simultaneously, so I did some thinking and came up with the
>following Nv layout. It looks interesting. Some familiar symetry that
>I've seen in more advanced neural networks, but a very simple layout! I
>have a small picture. If anyone has an opinion on the variation, it's
>definitely welcome...
>--
>
>
>Richard Piotter
>richfile@rconnect.com
>
>The Richfiles Robotics & TI web page:
>http://richfiles.calc.org
>
>For the BEAM Robotics list:
>BEAM Robotics Tek FAQ
>http://people.ne.mediaone.net/bushbo/beam/FAQ.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
Home