The other day I had a conversation with some people after giving a demonstration of our robot, and they said that if someone drove it, it wasn’t a robot. They felt that the only difference between our robot and an RC car was that ours costs a lot more, and if our “robot” was a robot, then why not your car or even a microwave. Your car does more without you knowing than most FIRST robots, and all you need to do for a microwave is press start.
My questions are:
Does the 10s autonomous mode make it a robot?
Does the fact that its for a competition make it a robot?
Or, are we just making expensive RC cars?
If none of these are true what do we spend 6 weeks doing?
robot n1. A mechanical device that resembles a human being and is capable of preforming human tasks or behaving in a human manner. 2. A person who works mechanically without original thought. 3. A machine or device that works automatically or by remote control.
So by definition 3 above, our robots are robots. Cars are not robots as they do not work by remote control (cars you and I drive). Microwaves could be a robot I guess.
My answer: It depends. If you’re fielding a robot without any autonomous or pre-programmed trickery, then no, it’s not a robot.
But with the advent of the CMUcam getting real competition use, I think we’re seeing more and more robots that are, well, robots. It’s even starting to spread beyond autonomous mode, with some teams trying to put aiming and even firing control this year in the hands of their RCs (with the humans only butting in when they have to), or automating an approach to the corner goal to get any doors to drop at the right distance away.
Now, how robot will the robots be next year? One can only guess–but this year was a pretty good year for them.
Remember, the MARS rovers also use human input to drive, but use sensors and other things to make it easier. I’d say now, if you are using the cameras and other sensors, then yes, it’s a robot. If you have a box that dumps balls and doesn’t move during auton, then no.
i believe yes. why? it is a mahine designed to complete a task without direct physical contact from an outside source ie a human. so based on this an rc car is a robot lacking in manipulator.
Whoops… Mike all ready pointed out the definition. Anyway, they are definately robots.
i believe yes. why? it is a mahine designed to complete a task without direct physical contact from an outside source ie a human. so based on this an rc car is a robot lacking in manipulator.
No. The definition is lacking. Teleoperated robots are capable of making decisions and doing actions independent of the operator.
I would agree with you if we were talking about the earlier generations of cars, which were purely mechanical devices. However, I think most cars nowadays do fall under the category of being a robot. Most cars have advanced computer systems and sensors incorperated into their mechanical systems. The computers and sensors enhance it’s ability to drive well, and also monitor for possible problems. Every day, it seems like cars are becoming more intelligent. Have you seen the commercials for the Lexus LS460? This car can park all by itself, with minimal human input. And of course, lets not forget the DARPA Grand Challenge!
The key to determining whether or not something is a robot is whether or not it has artificial intelligence. Any device which recieves input, interprets that input, and makes appropriate output based on those decisions - has artificial intelligence and is a robot. Purely mechanical devices are not robots, even if they are powered electrically by an on/off switch (that is operated by a human). However, if the device can gather data, and make independant decisions based on that data - it is a robot.
Under this classification, many everyday devices that we would not normally think of as robots - are in fact, robots. My answering machine, cell phone, thermostat, washing machine, computer, air conditioner, etc. - are all robots.
** FIRST robots andRC cars are robots too**. They take a radio signal, process it, and make intelligent output decisions based on the information it is given. Even if the output is merely to turn a motor on - it is still a robot because it has the intelligence (controls system) to convert a radio signal to a mechanical movement. It may not seem very advanced, but a device need not be complex to be considered a robot. It needs only one, basic characteristic - artificial intelligence (taking an input, thinking about it, and making an appropriate output).
just cause it doesn’t move during auto doen’t mean its not a robot
the way I define a robot is something that takes electronic data, interprets it with a macro/microcomputer, then with mechanical devices manipulates physical objects
well what is the OI other than a set of electronic sensors(analog sensors and digital sensors)
the way I see it is the OI sends data to the robot then the robot interprets the data and does something physical
is a airplane a robot . . yes(the new ones with the fly by wire thing)
is a RC car a robot . .yeah why not
is a microwave a robot . . yes . .but only if it has a spinning tray(otherwise its purely electronic)
I’ve talked to various people at demos and such who think FIRST is no big deal because they think that FRC robots are not real robots. After talking a few minutes about autonomous modes and some of the programming and sensing challenges involved, some of these people still think that FRC 'bots are not robots. Then, I mention the whole mentoring and inspiration part of FIRST.
At that point, if they STILL want to argue that FRC does not involve robots, but rather remote-controlled devices, I agree with them and hope they don’t ever get involved. Mabye I’m quick to judge here, but if someone is that hung up on a simple definition and can’t see the point of the program, then we’re probably better off without them.
