Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeTwo
Curious - I would have considered "Woody," our prototype robot in 2014 to be around 60% similar to "Buzz" even though they were built of different materials, because Buzz was built in aluminum to the dimensions worked out in lumber on Woody, and all of the functional points were implemented similarly. Our 2015 practice robot was north of 95%, only decorative and completely inconsequential differences like abandoned mounting holes. Anyway, was 60% the mean value? What were the median (50th percentile) and mode (commonest answers)? I suspect that this did not look at all like a normal distribution, even among teams with similar OPRs. It would be lovely if you could post a histogram.
|
Median varied between 0.7 and 0.9 depending on the division. Mode was 0.95 for all divisions. 95% usually meant functionally equivalent with all major systems and close enough to do code development, but possibly different enough that some tuning may be required.
Yes 125 answered back in 2012 with a Practice bot that was 40% representative. I don't have my field notes to know what that meant for that team for that year*, but usually that was similar drive train, or something to hook the shooter up to while tuning.
I also had helpers doing some of the interviews, so it may not have been me doing that particular interview.