[robocup-humanoid] WG: [Fwd: Field sizes used in 2008]

Wed Aug 20 11:08:51 EDT 2008

Hi All,

There can not be any doubt that an ancient and very moderately 
progressing league can _not_ impose any constraints on the development of 
a such an actively and dramatically progressing league like the humanoid 
league further to the RoboCup 2050 goal!

We should first discuss which field size is best for the humanoid 
league and then discuss how to consider other constraints.
The team leader voting in Suzhou was in favor of a moderate 
increase in field size.

The only reason I can imagine why RoboCup trustees want to have more
standardized field sizes can only be the cost of the fields.

The main cost for HL field has been the special lighting
but as the voting about lighting in the team leader meeting in Suzhou
clearly said, the HL will probably go to indoor lighting (TC still has to 
discuss).
But then cost is not a reason to have different field sizes
in HL and other leagues like SSL.

Regards,
Oskar

P.S.
SSL could be more progressive and introduce a combination
of global and local vision in 2009 to cover a larger field size.

On Wed, 20 Aug 2008, Thomas Röfer wrote:

> Hi,
>
> before discussing an increase of the field size, I forward a reaction from
> the Small Size League to my initial e-mail about field sizes. So far, they
> seem to be reluctant about increasing the size. So if we really want to
> increase the size, we must be pretty convincing:
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: zickler at gmail.com [mailto:zickler at gmail.com] Im Auftrag von Stefan
> Zickler
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Juli 2008 18:24
> An: Alexander Hofmann; Mahisorn Wongphati; Alfredo Weitzenfeld;
> small-size-committees at informatik.uni-bremen.de
> Cc: Thomas.Roefer at dfki.de
> Betreff: Re: [Fwd: Field sizes used in 2008]
>
> Hi All,
>
> I think the current SSL field-size has reached its limit given the
> two-camera setup, both in terms of resolution and distortion/occlusion
> caused by the very wide angle we have to cover. Many teams have
> already bought new lenses for this year, so we should maintain current
> field size as much as possible until we will eventually scale up the
> size significantly for 11 vs. 11 in 2011 or 2012. Such a significant
> scale-up should in my opinion only happen once shared vision is fully
> established and we will be able to run 4 cameras per field.
>
> As Tim suggested, this should not be too much of a problem for the
> other leagues. SPL and Humanoid should be able to easily adapt to the
> current SSL field-size, leaving only Aibo, which is being replaced by
> the new SPL anyhow.
>
> I have also had a short chat with Manuela and she agrees that SSL
> might have to "dictate" field sizes due to our global vision
> constraints, which is fine with her as long as all leagues agree on
> one field size.
>
> I think for now we should focus on two things:
> - ensure that current SSL size can and will be used among the other
> leagues for this and possibly next year.
> - coordinate with the other leagues about an eventual significant
> scale-up of the field in 2011 or 2012. I think such a scale-up would
> also benefit humanoid and SPL as their locomotion and teamplay should
> become more robust in the future.
>
> In terms of field markings we should try to find out the specific
> requirements of the other leagues and then create a proposal that
> incorporates our needs.
>
> Thomas already brought up the idea of having two rectangular defense
> areas. This might actually work out well for small-size, as the
> smaller one could take the role of the traditional defense area, and
> the larger one could become what's currently the 90cm radius for fair
> "header" positioning during corner-kicks. Having a line to better
> enforce this rule might actually be beneficial (as it was hard to ref
> this without markings in place).
>
> Thanks!
> Stefan
>
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 8:33 AM, Alexander Hofmann
> <alexander.hofmann at technikum-wien.at> wrote:
>> In my opinion we should keep the current size for 2009 and start a
>> discussion for 2010 right now. We should start to publish major rule
> changes
>> 1 year before, so every team can slowly adapt their systems.
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Alexander Hofmann
>>
>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>> Von: Mahisorn Wongphati [mailto:mahisorn.w at gmail.com]
>> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 30. Juli 2008 14:24
>> An: Alfredo Weitzenfeld
>> Cc: small-size-committees at informatik.uni-bremen.de
>> Betreff: Re: [Fwd: Field sizes used in 2008]
>>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I'm do agree with Alfredo. For our league, crease the field size to match
>> the biggest one still possible. And change the defense area to rectangular
>> shape may reduce some work of the constructor too.
>>
>> The only problem for increase the field size it the camera resolution.
>> Currently, Plasma-Z camera resolution is about 800x600 at 60Hz increase the
>> size of the field will not much effect them. However, team with 640x480
> will
>> surely have the problem with this change.
>>
>> Further more, at 4 m height some team's camera will not cover the whole
>> field for anymore. (Please see the attchement).
>>
>> Finally, If we (all leagues) need to change the field size. The most
> effect
>> league may be the SSL because we are the only league that use the global
>> camera. We should mention this issue to trustees to give us additional
>> weight for our vote.  The additional detail about this size and ratio of
> the
>> field issue also in the attached table. The may give us some aspect about
>> the percentage of play area change between each field size.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best Regards,
>> Mahisorn Wongphati
>>
>> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 10:08 AM, Alfredo Weitzenfeld <alfredo at itam.mx>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> From the table Tim sent, field sizes don't differ that much between
>>> leagues with the exception of MSL. Actually, SPL AIBO has slightly
>>> bigger field than us and others are very similar.
>>> So I wouldn't see a problem to standardize for next year.
>>> In the future, other leagues will probably want to increase their
>>> fields as well, so we can coordinate with them on that.
>>>
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Alfredo
>>>
>>> Prof. Dr. Alfredo Weitzenfeld
>>> Director ROBOTICS and CANNES Labs
>>> Computer Engineering Dept
>>> ITAM
>>> Río Hondo #1, San Angel Tizapán
>>> México DF, MEXICO CP 01000
>>> email: alfredo at itam.mx
>>> tel: +52-55-56284000 ext 3614
>>> tel: +52-55-56284060
>>> fax: +52-55-56284065
>>> ROBOTICS Lab: http://robotica.itam.mx
>>> CANNES Lab: http://cannes.itam.mx
>>> http://www.cannes.itam.mx/Alfredo/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Mensaje original-----
>>> De: Naruse Tadashi [mailto:naruse at ist.aichi-pu.ac.jp]
>>> Enviado el: Lunes, 28 de Julio de 2008 07:38 p.m.
>>> Para: Tim Laue; small-size-committees at informatik.uni-bremen.de
>>> Asunto: Re: [Fwd: Field sizes used in 2008]
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> The uniform field was suddenly proposed by Manuela this April. She
>>> requested the change this year. The reason was "Just for consistency
>>> for RoboCup in general".
>>> Since we had no time to change the field, we refused this year's change.
>>> So the issue start toward the next year.
>>>
>>> My opinion.
>>> It depends on how we realize the future plan of SSL, i.e. 11 on 11
>>> games. In case of 11 on 11 game, current field size is clearly too
>>> small. We cannot accept the uniform field except for the case that
>>> each league agreed with the SSL's larger field.
>>> So, we should decide the future plan (these five years) as soon as
>> possible.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Tadashi
>>>
>>>
>>> Tim Laue wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: Field sizes used in 2008
>>>> Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:06:42 +0200
>>>> From: Thomas Röfer <Thomas.Roefer at dfki.de>
>>>> Reply-To: <Thomas.Roefer at dfki.de>
>>>> Organization: DFKI-Labor Bremen
>>>> To: 'Humanoid League Technical & Organization Committees 2008'
>>>> <humanoid08 at jeap.org>,        <spl_tech at tzi.de>, 'Tim Laue'
>>>> <timlaue at informatik.uni-bremen.de>
>>>>
>>>> @Tim Laue: please forward to SSL TC
>>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> since the trustees want us to come up with a single field size for
>>>> all leagues except the Middle Size League, Tim Laue and I have
>>>> collected the current dimensions of the fields in our five
>>>> competitions. Since the different leagues measure different distances
>>>> to describe their field layout (e.g. center of line to center of line
>>>> vs. outside of line to outside of line), we described the dimensions
>>>> in a unified outside of line to outside of line manner. The only
>>>> exception is the specification of the crosses in the Humanoid League,
>>>> the position of which is given in a center of line to center of line
>>>> fashion, since these crosses do not exist in other leagues anyway.
>>>> For now, we left out the goals. We can talk about goals later.
>>>>
>>>> The motivation for outside to outside measurements is that the lines
>>>> are usually part of the area they surround.
>>>>
>>>> The general idea is to come up with a set of dimensions that fits for
>>>> all competitions. Since the size of the penalty area depends on the
>>>> size of
>>> the
>>>> goal, we also might think about two penalty areas on the same field.
>>>> In some competitions, the smaller one is used, in others the bigger
>>>> one is employed.
>>>>
>>>> After all TC members looked at the current dimensions, we can start
>>>> making suggestions for the "RoboCup Small Field".
>>>>
>>>> Best regards
>>>>
>>>> Thomas Röfer
>>>>
>>>> _____________________________________________________________________
>>>> __
>>>> Dr. Thomas Röfer
>>>> DFKI Bremen
>>>> Safe and Secure Cognitive Systems
>>>> Cartesium 00.055
>>>> Enrique-Schmidt-Str. 5
>>>> 28359 Bremen, Germany
>>>>
>>>> http://www.dfki.de
>>>> www.informatik.uni-bremen.de/~roefer
>>>>
>>>> Phone: +49 (421) 218-64200
>>>> Fax:   +49 (421) 218-9864200
>>>> eMail: Thomas.Roefer at dfki.de
>>>> _______________________________________________________________
>>>> Deutsches Forschungszentrum für Künstliche Intelligenz GmbH
>>>> Firmensitz: Trippstadter Straße 122, D-67663 Kaiserslautern
>>>>
>>>> Geschäftsführung:
>>>> Prof. Dr. Dr. h.c. mult. Wolfgang Wahlster (Vorsitzender) Dr. Walter
>>>> Olthoff
>>>>
>>>> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats:
>>>> Prof. Dr. h.c. Hans A. Aukes
>>>>
>>>> Amtsgericht Kaiserslautern, HRB 2313
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> La informaciÃ³n contenida en este mensaje de datos es confidencial,
>>> constituye un secreto industrial y/o profesional en tÃ(c)rminos de la
>>> legislaciÃ³n vigente y se encuentra dirigida exclusivamente al
>>> destinatario indicado en dicho mensaje. Si usted recibe esta
>>> informaciÃ³n por error o si usted no es el destinatario del mensaje,
>>> favor de notificar al emisor, y destrÃºyalo.
>>>
>>> The information contained in this electronic message is confidential,
>>> it constitutes a professional and/or industrial secret in terms of the
>>> current legislation, and is intended for its recipient only. If you
>>> receive this message by mistake and/or if you are not the recipient
>>> thereof, please notify the sender and destroy it.
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mahisorn Wongphati
>> Mishima, Japan
>>
>> Simple != Easy
>>
>>
>
>

--
Prof. Dr. Oskar von Stryk           E-Mail: stryk(at)sim.tu-darmstadt.de
Simulation, Systems Optimization    Phone:  ++49 (0) 6151-16-2513
and Robotics                        Fax:    ++49 (0) 6151-16-6648
Technische Universitaet Darmstadt   http://www.sim.tu-darmstadt.de
Hochschulstr. 10                    D-64289 Darmstadt, Germany