Slashdot Mirror
Preparing for the DARPA Autonomous Vehicle Challenge
Little Hamster writes "Post-gazette.com has an interesting article on the DARPA funded 200-mile autonomous vehicle race across the California-Nevada desert. They interviewed teams from two of the early favourites, Carnegie Mellon University and the California Institute of Technology. The teams talked about challenges on driving at high speed over a combination of roads, rough terrain and brush-covered desert, where the robot would need to consider how fast it can make a turn, the possibility of spinning tires and the potential to become airborne when hitting bumps."
This is really cool.. technology like this could be used in consumer cars to reduce rollover/tire spin/etc. Maybe even 'smart' cars that drive themselves, leaving the human passengers free to sleep or get work done.
find / -name "*.sig" | xargs rm
But some of it ends up benefiting the masses as well - like that little thing called the 'internet' that you used to post that comment detracting DARPA, for one ;)
find / -name "*.sig" | xargs rm
Get these robots to drive NASCAR to entertain the automatons known as fans.
You ever wonder if video game developers haven't already solved many of the AI issues in terms of driving?
The real problem would be getting the track information in real time and telling the AI what each object is.
Then again I am sure game developers get to cut a bunch of corners because the AI knows the track perfectly because it is a part of its system.
EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
The first posters here don't have a clue as to the effects and circumstances of this. The purpose is not Autonomous Kill Vehicles though it might occur. Cruise Missiles etc already do this as does the Predator to one degree or another. The purpose here is to reduce the overhead cost on the army dramatically in hauling supplies etc over long distances with or without roads. To do this you need vehicles than can bypass disabled vehicles and overcome obstacles. They need to be free of drivers who get tired and eat up supplies.
The real effect here will be civilian. The project which like it or not will happen regardless of DARPA someday soon, is going to very nearly completely alter how we live.
To illustrate: suppose you are old blind and unable to drive. (It happens to the best of us) Now you will be able to go where you want without somebody driving you. Suppose you want to go to work but don't want to own a car? Mass Transit? No! you just get on your cell phone and call for a car. It arrives shortly and takes you where you want to go and without a driver. Freight? No more Truck Drivers and the wreaks from them being too tired. No more Taxi Drivers. Close most of the Hospitals because wreaks are not filling them up. Kids will not need parents to drive them somewhere.
There is very nearly nothing more profound than this race! It will reorganize our world. The issue here is how will we adapt. This isn't an esoteric question. We had better face it now.
For the Luddites amung us, give it up. Stopping DARPA will only give the technological edge to China. They will do the work. This is a very high amplification Technology. It Amplifies People a LOT. The issue as always will be the morals of those being Amplified, and will we allow this to cause others to be lost in the "noise."
Never Politically Correct ~ I prefer the facts If you don't like what I say, get a life, or comment yourself.
but 90% of it's about killing people, making nuclear war more practical, or causing other kinds of evil and terrorism,
Oh come on! What kind of crap is this? Perhaps you've heard of that little DARPA creation called the INTARWEB?! =P
No one wants to make nuclear war 'practical.' 90% of research is about NOT killing people, as killing a lot of people typically doesn't help win wars. This isn't the middle ages where you can hope to wipe out an entire society in a single war. What DARPA is interested in is destroying *targets* - things like launchers, tanks, fighters, satellite links, etc. Successful live tests are those that *minimize* casualties, not maximize them. We've had the technology to maximize death for decades now.
ThisIsAnExampleAccount@yahoo.com /. denizens. Thanks!
ThisIsAnExampleAccount@yahoo.com
Please do not mod this message down. I am currently running an experiment to see which spambots are collecting addresses from Slashdot. Please do not mod down. In fact, if you could mod this up, that would be great. I will publish the results of this experiment as soon as it is complete. hopefully the results will be usefull to all
ThisIsAnExampleAccountGL@yahoo.com
I run one of the Grand Challenge teams, Team Overbot. We have a vehicle (a modified six wheel drive Polaris Ranger), a shop in Redwood City, funding, equipment, and people. We're well along; the vehicle has most of its actuators and some of the sensors working, and about a third of the software is running. We're one of the five DARPA-accepted teams.
Many of us are Stanford alumni or students, but this is not a Stanford project.
Our basic technical approach is to build a rugged, reliable vehicle with conservative control strategies. Others may be faster, but we expect they'll get into trouble at high speed. Our top speed is 40MPH. The real problem with the Grand Challenge is not going fast on the easy parts; it's getting through the hard parts.
The 6WD chassis we're using is one of the most bump-tolerant platforms around. It can go over railroad ties at top speed without problems and without going airborne. The center of gravity is low. The front and mid axles have independent suspension; the rear axle is a swing arm. This simplifies low-level vehicle control. All wheels can be driven, although at higher speeds, we will switch from 6WD to 4WD.
We have five computers on board. Three are small PC/104 machines, and two are Pentium 4 machines. All run QNX (the OS for when it has to work.) All are industrial-strength ruggedized units. The actuators are all servomotors driven by industrial microcontrollers. All this hardware is off-the-shelf industrial control gear.
Sensors include LIDAR, doppler RADAR, sonars, cameras, INS, GPS, etc. Some of them are used in unusual ways. That's all I'll say about that.
The pathfinding strategy is indeed borrowed from video game technology. It's more structured than Brooks-type behavior based robotics, and it's less structured than Latoumbe-type planning. There are three layers of control; the top one we call the "back seat driver", because it has only advisory authority over the "driver".
We have road map and topo data onboard, but it's used more as a hint than as rigid guidance. We take the waypoints DARPA gives us (on a CD, at 0430 hrs the morning of the race) and load it in. There's no offline preplanning. Wouldn't help in the real world.
If nobody wins this year, which is quite likely, we'll be back next year with a faster vehicle.
Post questions and I'll answer them here.
John Nagle
Team Overbot