Slashdot Mirror


Teach A Robot To Drive, Win A Million Bucks

An Anonymous Reader writes "DARPA has released the details of a 'Grand Challenge,' with a $1 million prize. The challenge is to build an autonomous vehicle which can 'navigate on its own over a 250-mile desert course in less than 10 hours.' from L.A. to Vegas, 'without external communication or human control.' The contest is to be conducted in March 2004, and is open to all comers. Can we get at least one entry to represent slashdot?" We've mentioned this contest a few times before: any intended entrants out there want to disclose your secret plans?

31 of 383 comments (clear)

  1. dislose? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    dislose? Does that mean find them?

  2. Sounds Easy To Me by ZeroLogic · · Score: 5, Funny

    Just make it really really big, with treads, and a huge freaking mulcher on the front. Then, just let it travel in a straight line from LA to Vegas. Crushing everything in its path!

    1. Re:Sounds Easy To Me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "For example, an extremely large vehicle that simply travels on a straight line between two points by climbing over or breaking through everything in its path (and destroying what cannot support that movement) is not the type of intelligent solution that is sought." - DARPA Site

      Obstacle intimidation algorithms not allowed. :/

  3. sounds like fun by Scorchen · · Score: 4, Funny

    robot prime suspect for fridays hit and run accident which resulted in the death of several school aged children..

    --
    CAPS LOCK IS CRUISE CONTROL FOR COOL!!
  4. Top Secret. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    "We've mentioned this contest a few times before: any intended entrants out there want to dislose your secret plans?"

    I could, but then I would have to kill you. :)

  5. Uh, riiight.... by xintegerx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The challenge is to build an autonomous vehicle which can 'navigate on its own over a 250-mile desert course in less than 10 hours.' from L.A. to Vegas, 'without external communication or human control.'

    Somehow I have the feeling that 99% of the teams competing will try to figure out inventive, creative ways of using and obfuscating 'external communication or human control' as the first step. :)

    1. Re:Uh, riiight.... by TopShelf · · Score: 4, Funny

      sounds simple enough... stick a midget inside!

      --
      Stop by my site where I write about ERP systems & more
    2. Re:Uh, riiight.... by effer · · Score: 5, Informative

      From the FAQ...

      Q11. Can I use differential global positioning system (GPS)?

      A11. The challenge vehicle is free to use publicly available signals. This includes differential GPS receivers in towns or counties along the way. A team may establish a private differential GPS receiver, as long as it is fully autonomous, at a checkpoint.

    3. Re:Uh, riiight.... by Nathdot · · Score: 4, Funny

      The challenge is to build an autonomous vehicle which can 'navigate on its own over a 250-mile desert course in less than 10 hours.' from L.A. to Vegas, 'without external communication or human control.'

      I'm pretty sure autonomous operation is of utmost importance to DARPA. On goes the tinfoil hat but:
      PHASE 1: 'navigate on its own over a 250-mile desert course in less than 10 hours.'
      PHASE 2: Transform into robot-humanoid form.
      PHASE 3: Identify targets. Lock. Fire.
      (PHASE 4: Profit!)

      The only question you've gotta ask is, in today's ambiguous political environment, who are the autobots and who are the decepticons?

      Seriously, call me a troll, but would DARPA be interested in an autonomous vehicle capable of navigating desert terrain, without also considering coupling it with an autonomous weapon system? Or maybe I just spent too much time playing Command & Conquer back in the day.

  6. Before we teach the robots how to drive... by Ron+Coscorrosa · · Score: 5, Funny

    Can we teach the humans to, as well?

    1. Re:Before we teach the robots how to drive... by shaitand · · Score: 4, Funny

      Humans are incapable of doing most anything
      properly by and large. If humans could drive
      why would we need to teach robots?

    2. Re:Before we teach the robots how to drive... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm going to put a tin-foiled box over my head and talk in a monotone voice then just drive the car myself to win the prize. Haha! See you in Vegas, suckers!

      Hey man, can you teach me how to drive?

  7. Its a long shot... by kinnell · · Score: 5, Funny

    but just pointing an old car in the right direction with the steering wheel and accelarator jammed would have a small chance of victory. It would make a lot more sense than playing the lottery, and on the off chance that it did work, it would piss off DARPA no end.

    --
    If I seem short sighted, it is because I stand on the shoulders of midgets
  8. how to succeed in AI contests without really tryin by kurosawdust · · Score: 5, Funny
    The challenge is to build an autonomous vehicle which can 'navigate on its own over a 250-mile desert course in less than 10 hours.' from L.A. to Vegas, 'without external communication or human control.' ...any intended entrants out there want to disclose your secret plans?

    I plan to build a 250-mile-long car.

  9. True by leerpm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    But the devil ends up being in the details. While it probably would not be too hard to design a vehicle that could do this in a couples day or so, 250 miles in 10 hours means the vehicle would have to be averageing 25 mph. At 25 mph, there is not a whole lot of room for error. You would need a system that could react to environmental issues that came up very quickly such as obstacles, or dead end routes. You would also need to a system that could actually sense/see far enough ahead to steer the vehicle in the correct direction without running into things.

  10. Slashdot Entry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    If someone from Slashdot enters a vehicle, it should definitely be named "Autonomous Coward." :)

  11. The hard part by Jim+Ethanol · · Score: 5, Funny

    The challenge here is real-time processing of vision data to handle obstacle avoidance, etc.

    They say that you can use "public navigation signals. So a GPS (and backup) receiver, along with a Digital Elevation Map of the area would be half the battle. But real-time stereoscopic vision is a bitch. The nice thing is that you can fit a whole lot of computing power into a medium sized car.

    I suspect another big problem will be colliding with other bot cars... I'm thinking about running a Ford Pinto, which due to the placement of it's gas tank, will explode on impact. At least that away the other robot cars will FEAR mine and stay away ;)

    -JE

    "You're always going to have problems moving a body in one piece" -- Brick Top

  12. Perhaps not that hard? by ryants · · Score: 4, Informative
    This is from Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach, by Stuart Russel and Peter Norvig, published 1995:
    ALVINN (Autonomous Land Vehicle In a Neural Network) ... is a neural network that has performed quite well in a domain where other approaches have failed. It learns to steer a vehicle along a single lane on a highway by observing the performance of a human driver. ... The results of the traning are impressive. ALVINN has driven at speeds up to 70 mph for distances up to 90 miles on public highways near Pittsburgh. It has also drive at normal speeds on single lane dirt roads, paved bike paths, and tow lane suburban streets.
    The only problem is the training... the system is unable to drive on roads that it doesn't have training data for. I glanced quickly at the DARPA rules and didn't see anything that would invalidate a "build a similar course and train on it" approach. So take ALVINN, build lots of courses that sound like the sort that DARPA is planning, and train, train, train!

    References:

    --

    Ryan T. Sammartino
    "Ancora imparo"

  13. Great! More DARPA money by brejc8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Its very annoying being a researcher with moral objections. DARPA is offering $40mil towards asynchronous research. Our research group is one of the best in the area but after discussing the situation we decided not to to take the money. Most of the group (including me) don't really want to do military research. One of the projects most suited to the group would be making some processors for missiles and I definately wouldnt be happy about that.

    There is the case that we could do a pure research project for them. No direct link with weapons but simply making tools to make asynchronous processors but we may be blocked from publishing research and still (more indirectly) killing people.

    I never though that in computers you would have to think so hard about what money and projects to accept but this is one I would skip. Its obveous that DARPA want some long range seeking technology but they want good engineers (ones who wouldnt work for them directly) to do their work and warm them over in the pretence that its a fun game. I can't think of many engineers who wouldn't want to have a go at this challenge.

  14. Mars rover concepts by cybermace5 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    The robot ideally needs to be able to navigate without fear of being stuck on a 2" pebble 100' from the starting line. Obviously you can't map 250 miles of terrain down to millimeter resolution, but you can design the robot to render such obstacles nonexistant.

    One concept is a large inflated sphere with light tread patches on the outside. The power/electronics pack is suspended inside with cables running to various points on the sphere. By adjusting the lengths of the cables, the sphere can shift the center of gravity and roll forward. A 6 to 10 foot sphere would allow most small obstacles to be avoided, then the robot only needs to note current position and the general surrounding topography.

    Major difficulties with this concept are high winds (unless they are blowing in the right direction!) and steep uphill gradients.

    --
    ...
  15. Re:A pittance. by worst_name_ever · · Score: 4, Insightful
    $1 million doesn't even scratch the surface...

    I think it's safe to assume that the winner of the contest (as well as, perhaps, the first few runners-up) will very shortly find himself the recipient of multiple large DoD contracts for further research into autonomous robot tanks^H^H^H^H^Hvehicles.

    --

    In Soviet Rush, today's Tom Sawyer gets high on you.
  16. It is not open to all comers by lfourrier · · Score: 4, Interesting

    3.1 Team Must Be U.S. Entity

    The Challenge is open only to US entities. This includes U.S. corporations, U.S. non-profit organizations, U.S. universities, U.S. citizens, sole proprietors that are U.S. citizens or permanent residents, and partnerships of U.S. citizens or permanent residents.

  17. Even Faster Than That by sacdelta · · Score: 5, Informative
    From the rules:
    2.19.3 Maximum Finishing Time

    In order to qualify for the Grand Challenge cash award, the maximum corrected finishing time of the winning team must be less than six hours. Additionally, to ensure safe operation during daylight hours only, all vehicles must be removed from the route ten hours after their departure.
    If you want the money you have to do it in 6 hours. This is just over 40 mph. But some of the route is paved which should allow for higher speeds for parts of the course.

    The rules also state that the route will be navigable/avoidable by a standard 4x4 pickup (HINT HINT).

    Having driven out in the desert, even on the dirt roads, most of it can be driven at 60+ mph. You just have to be ready for the parts that can't be driven faster than 5 mph.
    --

    Brought to you by: "Al"toids - the curiously weird mint.

    1. Re:Even Faster Than That by sacdelta · · Score: 4, Informative
      2.24 Challenge Area

      The Challenge area includes the Departure Area, Departure Line, Challenge Route, Checkpoint Area, Arrival Line, Arrival Area, and any other area that has been assigned to DARPA for the purpose of conducting this Challenge. The specific boundaries of the Challenge area will be briefed to the Participants at a pre-Challenge brief shortly prior to the Challenge.

      It sounds like they give the details of the route only a short time before the actual race (maybe a couple of days? hours?) so it would probably be a good idea to have built-in GPS to assign the waypoints quickly, easily and accurately.

      The point of the exercise is to see how well the robot car can deal with "unknown" conditions, so I would wager that pre-driving would be discouraged.

      In fact:
      Vehicles that cannot demonstrate intelligent _autonomous_ behavior will not be accepted as Participants.

      So a marker based vehicle would be right out.
      --

      Brought to you by: "Al"toids - the curiously weird mint.

  18. Misunderstanding, possibly not reading by rzbx · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It seems a lot of slashdot folk here don't read before they post. Some are already talking about avoiding other vehicles on the road. First off, do you really think they would allow a bunch of robotic vehicles to drive along side drivers? Second, it does mention across the desert both off and on road, but does not say anything about public roads where it must avoid other vehicles.
    Another thing mentioned was GPS. Someone complained about not being able to use GPS. If that person had done some reading (FAQ on the page) then they would have seen that a public GPS or a private autonomous GPS receiver is allowed.

    Now my thoughts on this challenge.
    A few things I think are most important here are:
    4x4 type of vehicle (truck, SUV, Hummer, Jeep, etc.) (Automatic prefered for ease of use)
    A must have GPS receiver.
    Infrared obstacle detection device (180 degrees) about 100 meters.
    Also, another device to analyze the terrain about 180 degrees around the front of the vehicle out to about 100 meters.
    Attach the GPS, obstacle device, and terrain device to a computer and also have the computer hooked up to the acceleration pedal, brake pedal, and shifter to put into park or drive.

    The terrain device would be the most complicated. Then all you would need is a few good programmers that can work with the data the different devices provide and your set. I'm not sure if such terrain devices exist outside the military, but I'm sure some laser/infrared/etc. engineers out there could produce a basic one. This project isn't as complicated as it sounds, but it would take some good engineers and programmers to finish. Just my thoughts.

    --
    Question everything.
  19. What's wrong with making processors for missles? by raehl · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You're just looking at the problem all wrong.

    You're not providing the guidance so the missle kills someone, you're providing the guidance so the missle DOESN'T kill all the doctors and patients in the hospital next door to the target.

  20. Re:Before you slam DARPA.. by ocelotbob · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Lemme guess, you'd also like to slam DARPA for builing that blasted ARPAnet? I mean, what good ever came of that?

    --

    Marxism is the opiate of dumbasses

  21. Team Slashdot? by JWSmythe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    G'morning all.

    This sounds like fun.. Personally, I don't have *ALL* the skills required to pull this one off, but if anyone's forming a team in the Los Angeles area, I'm in.. I have skills everywhere from the technical aspects of making a vehicle work to engineering of the hardware involved.

    I'm thinking something like a slightly modified S-10 Blazer, or K5 Blazer. Positraction (not available on the older S-10's) is a must. Probably the K5 would be the better choice, for extra room in the engine compartment for controls.

    I did a quick read through their forums. There's some interesting (and optimistic) talk of stereo vision through, laser vision/guidance, and ground evaluation through radar.. A few of the people sound like they have a clue, and some others didn't even read the rules..

    Some of them are talking about exotic hardware solutions, that they'll probably spend all the available time building, and then wonder why they don't have a working vehicle to go with it. Some others were talking about cool Xeon based systems, and forget that they get hot, and this is going to be running in a vehicle in the desert for 10 hours. One mentioned the hardships of hard drives, and doesn't even realize that you can use Compact Flash as your hard drive, and do stuff from there. No one yet mentioned using Linux.. :)

    My thoughs on a practical vehicle is a late 80's Chevy K5 blazer. Radar (like the backup radar in late model Lincoln's) to evaluate for local blockages. Vision system, like a stereo camera hooked up to a Linux box (this is where I'm at a loss. I don't think I could do this software).

    Steering control would be an electric motor with chain drive just before the steering box. That way, no major changes to the steering need to be done.

    Acceleration is a simple motor pulling on the throttle assembly, just like the vacuume accuator on cruise control.

    Braking would need to be something more substantial. probably a pneumatic ram on the brake pedal lever itself.

    I'd suspect it'll take a few computers to run it, but in something the size of a K5 blazer, we'd have no only room to mount it, but more than enough room to mount it preventing shocks... The computers would need to be hard-drive free though.. Compact flash cards of say 512Mb would be just about all we'd have to work with. That should be sufficent though.

    The site says they're providing several checkpoints which are mandatory to pass through/stop at. There will also be mandatory waypoints, which define the path. Fairly easily, go from waypoint to waypoint. If there's an obstical, decide for left or right turn to go around.. More than likely the easiest thing would be to use GPS to establish a location (when available), and use other public navigation beacons the rest of the time.

    Anyone who's flown knows how many radio navigation beacons are available. :) Radio stations make for decent markers too. Since you have something the size of a truck, it would be a piece of cake to triangulate distance and direction to any one becon, and use any two to fix location.

    When you detect an obstical, mark it on an onboard map, and figure out a way around. That would be for big obsticals like canyons or mountains. Small obsticals, you steer around.

    I can design and build anything required to make the vehicle itself work. Navigation will be up to someone else. This is/will be a team project, so as many hands as we can get involved would be cool.

    Can we get Cmdr Taco's permission to put "Slashdot" down the side of the truck? :)

    Who's in? Reply here first, then we'll get in contact in real life.

    --
    Serious? Seriousness is well above my pay grade.
  22. Italian Linux-based project should compete by HuguesT · · Score: 4, Funny

    No offence to Italian drivers, but this little project developed an autonomous vehicle using Linux, that could drive on Italian highways. Pretty impressive!

    the ARGO project

    If you've ever driven in Italy you should be impressed too...

  23. It should be so easy... by CreateWindowEx · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Neural nets and "traditional Algorithms" aren't magic bullets, and each subtask you mention "id cars (and their relative speeds)", "find speed limit signs" is a hard problem. While neural nets do have uses in limited cases, they never lived up to all the hype. There's a very big difference between toy problem-domains like "blockworld" or "wumpus world" and the real world, and a lot of very plausible-sounding methods just don't scale to reality.

    People have been working on "smart cars" for decades, thowing every technique you mention (and quite a few more) at the problem, and I don't think we're close to having a robot car that could be trusted to drive unsupervised in real traffic...

    However, feel free to prove me wrong by winning the contest!

  24. If we can't tell the difference... by A+nonymous+Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ... it must be the touring test.