Olympic Robot Building Manual

The 1989 AI Lab Winter Olympics will take a slightly different twist from previous Olympiads. Although there will still be a dozen or so athletic competitions, the annual talent show finale will now be a display not of human talent, but of robot talent. Spurred on by the question, "Why aren't there more robots running around the AI Lab?", Olympic Robot Building is an attempt to teach everyone how to build a robot and get them started. Robot kits will be given out the last week of classes before the Christmas break and teams have until the Robot Talent Show, January 27th, to build a machine that intelligently connects perception to action. There is no constraint on what can be built; participants are free to pick their own problems and solution implementations. As Olympic Robot Building is purposefully a talent show, there is no particular obstacle course to be traversed or specific feat to be demonstrated. The hope is that this format will promote creativity, freedom and imagination. This manual provides a guide to overcoming all the practical problems in building things. What follows are tutorials on the components supplied in the kits: a microprocessor circuit "brain", a variety of sensors and motors, a mechanical building block system, a complete software development environment, some example robots and a few tips on debugging and prototyping. Parts given out in the kits can be used, ignored or supplemented, as the kits are designed primarily to overcome the intertia of getting started. If all goes well, then come February, there should be all kinds of new members running around the AI Lab!

On Motion Planning with Uncertainty

Robots must successfully plan and execute tasks in the presence of uncertainty. Uncertainty arises from errors in modeling, sensing, and control. Planning in the presence of uncertainty constitutes one facet of the general motion planning problem in robotics. This problem is concerned with the automatic synthesis of motion strategies from high level task specification and geometric models of environments. In order to develop successful motion strategies, it is necessary to understand the effect of uncertainty on the geometry of object interactions. Object interactions, both static and dynamic, may be represented in geometrical terms. This thesis investigates geometrical tools for modeling and overcoming uncertainty. The thesis describes an algorithm for computing backprojections o desired task configurations. Task goals and motion states are specified in terms of a moving object's configuration space. Backprojections specify regions in configuration space from which particular motions are guaranteed to accomplish a desired task. The backprojection algorithm considers surfaces in configuration space that facilitate sliding towards the goal, while avoiding surfaces on which motions may prematurely halt. In executing a motion for a backprojection region, a plan executor must be able to recognize that a desired task has been accomplished. Since sensors are subject to uncertainty, recognition of task success is not always possible. The thesis considers the structure of backprojection regions and of task goals that ensures goal recognizability. The thesis also develops a representation of friction in configuration space, in terms of a friction cone analogous to the real space friction cone. The friction cone provides the backprojection algorithm with a geometrical tool for determining points at which motions may halt.

On Probabilistic Strategies for Robot Tasks

Robots must act purposefully and successfully in an uncertain world. Sensory information is inaccurate or noisy, actions may have a range of effects, and the robot's environment is only partially and imprecisely modeled. This thesis introduces active randomization by a robot, both in selecting actions to execute and in focusing on sensory information to interpret, as a basic tool for overcoming uncertainty. An example of randomization is given by the strategy of shaking a bin containing a part in order to orient the part in a desired stable state with some high probability. Another example consists of first using reliable sensory information to bring two parts close together, then relying on short random motions to actually mate the two parts, once the part motions lie below the available sensing resolution. Further examples include tapping parts that are tightly wedged, twirling gears before trying to mesh them, and vibrating parts to facilitate a mating operation.

Preliminary Observations on Program Instability

This white paper reports emerging findings at the end of Phase I of the Lean Aircraft Initiative in the Policy focus group area. Specifically, it provides details about research on program instability. Its objective is to discuss high-level findings detailing: 1) the relative contribution of different factors to a program’s overall instability; 2) the cost impact of program instability on acquisition programs; and 3) some strategies recommended by program managers for overcoming and/or mitigating the negative effects of program instability on their programs. Because this report comes as this research is underway, this is not meant to be a definitive document on the subject. Rather, is it anticipated that this research may potentially produce a number of reports on program instability-related topics. The government managers of military acquisition programs rated annual budget or production rate changes, changes in requirements, and technical difficulties as the three top contributors, respectively, to program instability. When asked to partition actual variance in their program’s planned cost and schedule to each of these factors, it was found that the combined effects of unplanned budget and requirement changes accounted for 5.2% annual cost growth and 20% total program schedule slip. At a rate of approximately 5% annual cost growth from these factors, it is easy to see that even conservative estimates of the cost benefits to be gained from acquisition reforms and process improvements can quickly be eclipsed by the added cost associated with program instability. Program management practices involving the integration of stakeholders from throughout the value chain into the decision making process were rated the most effective at avoiding program instability. The use of advanced information technologies was rated the most effective at mitigating the negative impact of program instability.

Preliminary Observations on Program Instability

This white paper reports emerging findings at the end of Phase I of the Lean Aircraft Initiative in the Policy focus group area. Specifically, it provides details about research on program instability. Its objective is to discuss high-level findings detailing: 1) the relative contribution of different factors to a program’s overall instability; 2) the cost impact of program instability on acquisition programs; and 3) some strategies recommended by program managers for overcoming and/or mitigating the negative effects of program instability on their programs. Because this report comes as this research is underway, this is not meant to be a definitive document on the subject. Rather, is it anticipated that this research may potentially produce a number of reports on program instability-related topics. The government managers of military acquisition programs rated annual budget or production rate changes, changes in requirements, and technical difficulties as the three top contributors, respectively, to program instability. When asked to partition actual variance in their program’s planned cost and schedule to each of these factors, it was found that the combined effects of unplanned budget and requirement changes accounted for 5.2% annual cost growth and 20% total program schedule slip. At a rate of approximately 5% annual cost growth from these factors, it is easy to see that even conservative estimates of the cost benefits to be gained from acquisition reforms and process improvements can quickly be eclipsed by the added cost associated with program instability. Program management practices involving the integration of stakeholders from throughout the value chain into the decision making process were rated the most effective at avoiding program instability. The use of advanced information technologies was rated the most effective at mitigating the negative impact of program instability.