Alt-BEAM Archive
Message #02445
To: Steven Bolt sbolt@xs4all.nl
From: Bob Shannon bshannon@tiac.net
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 1999 20:43:25 -0700
Subject: [alt-beam] Re: CPU again? (was Beam genome)
Steven Bolt wrote:
>
> On Wed, 14 Apr 1999, Bob Shannon wrote:
>
> ---8<---
> > BEAM research explicitly states that the goal is to increase the
> > 'survival space' and behavioral efficiency.
> >
> > How are the mechanics or sensors available today inadequate?
>
> Little and large robots invariably get stuck, turn turtle, fall
> down vulcano's, and run out of oomph. I can think of many tasks for
> a `bot with the speed, agility and stamina of a mouse...
There are a lot of robots that do not get stuck like this at all. There
are even robots that operate in highly unstructured real world
situations
that perform better than your describing here.
This sounds like BEAM mythology.
I've got small CPU based robots that manage to deal with housecats
without
getting stuck.
> The sensors of today's robots are not even pathetic when compared
> with those of an ant, while computers may get close to an ants brain
> functionality. Or to keep it simpler: I'm working on a robotic lawn
> mower (on paper, that is). Since my lawns are level, `bot mobility
> is not a serious problem. But recognizing grass! I can't think of a
> sensor that will do a proper job. And I don't want to dig in a
> perimeter wire.
This is a controller problem Steven. Its not a sensor problem.
You can see that this is the case by making a simple remote control lawn
mower. A TV camara with the right lens is more than enough sensor for
your
brain.
Unless your lawn is on the move often, you could use differential GPS to
keep
the mower on course and in bounds.
Thats a better sensor than any in an ant!
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/alt-beam
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
Home