DPRG List  

[DPRG] Is subsumption old hat?

Subject: [DPRG] Is subsumption old hat?
From: Randy M. Dumse rmd at newmicros.com
Date: Fri Sep 7 19:43:48 CDT 2007

Dave Grubb opined: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 5:54 AM
> Well the author is absolutely right of course. Robotics as a 
> field of study has moved on, just as it moved from reactive 
> to cognitive to subsumption. 
> However, just because the focus of research has moved from 
> one paradigm to another it doesn't mean that those superseded 
> paradigms are useless. If a practical problem can be solved 
> by using a subsumption architecture then it's entirely 
> appropriate to do so. I think that the popularity of 
> subsumption amongst amateur groups stems from that it does 
> offer a robust and easy to implement solution to the kinds of 
> problems of a scale tackled by  hobbyists. ...

But here's the point, Dave. Can you name the next architecture
that replaced subsumption? Or can anyone primarily in the
hobbiest side of interest name the next one? I doubt it.

So if robotics reseach has moved on, back in 1992, even if
subsumption is useful and robost, which I admit it is, does that
mean that an additional 15 years of research not provided
something even more useful and robust? Or are we as hobbiest
just that far behind the times that we don't even discuss the
new advances. 

New advances, there? Or not there? If they're there, then why
don't we even know their name(s)?


More information about the DPRG mailing list