AutoRef system architecture: Difference between revisions
20204923@TUE (talk | contribs) |
20204923@TUE (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
===Stakeholder concerns=== | ===Stakeholder concerns=== | ||
An analysis of concerns for the AutoRef system led to the definition of two key concerns: continuity and fairness. | |||
Concern for continuity in AutoRef's development was particularly a stepping point for the system architecture's development. | |||
====Continuity==== | ====Continuity==== | ||
Revision as of 12:04, 31 March 2021
The system architecture for the AutoRef autonomous referee for RoboCup Middle Size League (MSL) is a proposed conceptual model which describes the structure, behavior, and more views of the AutoRef systemREFERENCE LIST NEEDED.
AutoRef MSD 2020 primarily focused on specifying the functions of the AutoRef as derived from the MSL rulebook (v21.4). In short, this functional specification is a breakdown of MSL rule (or law) into robot skills through robot tasks: tasks are statements describing what the AutoRef must do to enforce the rules, written in plain language as to fully explain referee actions without describing the means by which to achieve them; skills are fundamental abilities which are needed to accomplish a specific task.
A systems thinking approach underscores the system architecture.
Recommendations for future work emphasize an updated functional decomposition to synchronize the textual breakdown of law-task-skill and the corresponding game state flow visualization.
Systems thinking
Stakeholder concerns
An analysis of concerns for the AutoRef system led to the definition of two key concerns: continuity and fairness.
Concern for continuity in AutoRef's development was particularly a stepping point for the system architecture's development.
Continuity
Concern from stakeholders
Archive team of MSD 2020 concluded continuity was not emphasized or achieved [better word choice] by previous team contributions to AutoRef. The archive team's analysis justified/proved stakeholders concern regarding continuity.
This archiving concluded that this continuity was not achieved partly due to:
- unclear global overarching structure
- lack of an overview across previous team contributions
Outcome
The archiving process's result that a clearly defined global overarching structure was missing combined with the systems thinking's analysis of stakeholder concerns (for continuity) led to the conclusion that the translation of laws in the MSL rulebook into ...
Law-task-skill
Decided to translate rulebook from laws to tasks and break them down into skills.
Why? Referee must enforce rules — primary function/duty of a referee.