STAMP (Statistical Team Analysis of Match Performance) is off and running!

[Ethulin]

Thats right, STAMP is live and well and under development.

Check it out at:
http://stampscouting.org/

Currently all the input pages have ben designed.

The development schedule runs as this:
Fri. Feb 3: Database design will be finished
Fri. Feb 10: Link input pages to database
Fri. Feb 17: Output pages finished
- BETA RELEASE 1 -
Fri. Feb 24: All bugs fixed
- Official 1.0 release

There will be intermittent release afterward based on feedback.

Incase you missed out what STAMP was all about:
What makes STAMP so different?
What will make STAMP so different is the kind of data it collects, and therefore the kind of information you have on a team. STAMP allows the user to input and then display how a team acts on a variety of criteria during the match and therefore be able to predict how team will act in the future.

Why should we use STAMP instead of gathering qualitative data about a team or robot?
There are a few reasons. Firstly you need to take a step back and look at what you are doing this for. What we want as scouts is to be able to A know what our opponents are going to do and B know who to pick in an alliance. To achieve that what you really need to know is how a robot performed in a way that you can compare to other teams. The second reason is that performance never lies, though someone who has been milling a machine for the past 6 weeks tends to try to talk up their bot. STAMP gives you the truth, no frills attached.

What is STAMP written in?
STAMP is written in PHP and HTML, using mySQL as a database.

What software do I need to run STAMP?
You will need a webserver such as Apache, PHP, and mySQL. You may also want PHPMyAdmin which will make editing tables much easier. If you have a windows or linux box that will be running STAMP then you should consider getting XAMPP. XAMPP has Apache, PHP and mySQL all in one easy installer and one very easy to use interface to manage them.

Thanks to the multi-team development team, in specific:
Team 93:
Brandon Ripley
Jeremy Johnson
Stephen Baumler
Brent Denton

Team 492:
Erik Thulin
Ryan Mcelroy

Team 180:
Jon Cohen

Again, http://www.stampscouting.org

[buss]

Add one more developer from team 180:
Steven Buss

[Ethulin]

Add one more developer from team 180:
Steven Buss

Well I can't edit the post but you have been added to the developers page on the site. Welcome aboard Steven!

[Ethulin]

I thought you could do with some teasers, so here is the match input field for STAMP:

STAMP is PHP and mySQL based so you will be able to run it on any webserver. We will even be issueing an easy to install apache+mysql+php suite so all you have to do is click "go"!

[Bill Moore]

I thought you could do with some teasers, so here is the match input field for STAMP:

STAMP is PHP and mySQL based so you will be able to run it on any webserver. We will even be issueing an easy to install apache+mysql+php suite so all you have to do is click "go"!
Interesting concept, but performance can lie, if you only focus on scores. How do you account for a score of "0", when the best bot at a competition gets pushed over at the beginning of a match? The other bot may get penalized or DQ'd, but that doesn't help the bot laying on its' side unable to perform.

I have seen this every year since 2002, where a bot plays overaggressive penalized defense against one of the best bots at a comp, and the good bot is knocked over. This is where numbers go wrong. The best bot would score nothing for this match, and drop in your standings, but in the playoffs, these actions drawing a penalty would result in a DQ for the offending alliance. So, even though the best bot may not score in the playoffs, they would still be credited with a win. The "quality" of the best bots 0 score in the qualification match is very poor, because it was not earned through play, but by penalty. If the best bot played a full match and was blocked throughout, and was unable to score, then the 0 score would be fully deserved, and the "quality" of that number would be very high.

I can foresee matches this year, where a slower bot who can only score one ball at a time is ignored, to concentrate on stopping a better bot from scoring. The lesser bot, without anyone playing defense scores 15 points; the better bot, with three robots pushing him for the full 2 minutes 10 seconds scores 14 points. Which bot will you fear most come playoffs? At some point, just like all researchers, you have to assess the quality of the data you are collecting.

[Ethulin]

Interesting concept, but performance can lie, if you only focus on scores. How do you account for a score of "0", when the best bot at a competition gets pushed over at the beginning of a match? The other bot may get penalized or DQ'd, but that doesn't help the bot laying on its' side unable to perform.

I have seen this every year since 2002, where a bot plays overaggressive penalized defense against one of the best bots at a comp, and the good bot is knocked over. This is where numbers go wrong. The best bot would score nothing for this match, and drop in your standings, but in the playoffs, these actions drawing a penalty would result in a DQ for the offending alliance. So, even though the best bot may not score in the playoffs, they would still be credited with a win. The "quality" of the best bots 0 score in the qualification match is very poor, because it was not earned through play, but by penalty. If the best bot played a full match and was blocked throughout, and was unable to score, then the 0 score would be fully deserved, and the "quality" of that number would be very high.

I can foresee matches this year, where a slower bot who can only score one ball at a time is ignored, to concentrate on stopping a better bot from scoring. The lesser bot, without anyone playing defense scores 15 points; the better bot, with three robots pushing him for the full 2 minutes 10 seconds scores 14 points. Which bot will you fear most come playoffs? At some point, just like all researchers, you have to assess the quality of the data you are collecting.

Hello Bill and thanks for your interest!

We will do as much as we can to account for this type of situations. For example we will discount mathematical outlier, such as the scenario above. We also have a handy dandy "Notes" section for each robot so you know what happened!

We will also calculate many other variables such as if the bot's performance is increasing or decreasing, and if so by what rate. We will calculate the consistency (their standard deviation from their mean score) as well as many other variables. It is no doubt there is still a "human" element. You need some one who knows what their doing to sift through all this data and rankings to really determine what you need to do to win, this just makes it easier and more accurate.

Hope that cleared up some of your questions!

- Erik

[Bill Moore]

Hello Bill and thanks for your interest!

We will do as much as we can to account for this type of situations. For example we will discount mathematical outlier, such as the scenario above. We also have a handy dandy "Notes" section for each robot so you know what happened!

We will also calculate many other variables such as if the bot's performance is increasing or decreasing, and if so by what rate. We will calculate the consistency (their standard deviation from their mean score) as well as many other variables. It is no doubt there is still a "human" element. You need some one who knows what their doing to sift through all this data and rankings to really determine what you need to do to win, this just makes it easier and more accurate.

Hope that cleared up some of your questions!

- Erik
Thanks!

I am indeed interested in seeing what the program can do.