Difference between revisions of "Problems"
From Tamp Benchmarking
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
I propose two problems (and wait for other proposals), which respect the requirements discussed above, and which are described in <ref>Fabien Lagriffoul. ''On Benchmarks for Combined Task and Motion Planning.'' TAMP Workshop, RSS 2016.</ref>. I find these problems interesting due to the strong dependencies between logical and geometric level, plus the fact that they can be scaled up [to be completed]. | I propose two problems (and wait for other proposals), which respect the requirements discussed above, and which are described in <ref>Fabien Lagriffoul. ''On Benchmarks for Combined Task and Motion Planning.'' TAMP Workshop, RSS 2016.</ref>. I find these problems interesting due to the strong dependencies between logical and geometric level, plus the fact that they can be scaled up [to be completed]. | ||
| − | [[File: | + | [[File:tampbenchmark.aass.oru.se/pics/bm1.jpg|problem1]] |
Work in progress: migration to the PR2 platform, converting problem 11 to a humanoid robot setup. | Work in progress: migration to the PR2 platform, converting problem 11 to a humanoid robot setup. | ||
== References == | == References == | ||
Revision as of 19:26, 8 January 2017
I propose two problems (and wait for other proposals), which respect the requirements discussed above, and which are described in [1]. I find these problems interesting due to the strong dependencies between logical and geometric level, plus the fact that they can be scaled up [to be completed].
Work in progress: migration to the PR2 platform, converting problem 11 to a humanoid robot setup.
References
- ↑ Fabien Lagriffoul. On Benchmarks for Combined Task and Motion Planning. TAMP Workshop, RSS 2016.
