Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Deep Green - A Pool Playing Robot?

Posted by michael on Sat Aug 07, 2004 05:06 AM
from the bank-shot dept.
Robotics Education Science
o0zi writes "A Canadian scientist has created another game-playing machine, designed for a far simpler purpose than chess: playing pool. The world's first pool-playing robot consists of a slim box that glides along tracks above a pool table, and shoots using a camera-guided cue. Deep Green pots only half the shots it plans for - supposedly the same as a below average player - but this is expected to improve."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Deep Green - A Pool Playing Robot? 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • My first thought was that it should be very easy to get a higher percentage of shots, but I guess that a lot of shots require 'english' to make, probably something that is not easily computed.

    Having recently tried snooker for the first time, I can appreciate the difficulty!

    • I played snooker at a fairly high level for a while (I could break over a 100 periodically) and regularly ran 40 to 70 point breaks.

      That said, I agree that the 'english', the spin placed on the ball will be a challenge. Especially if they wish to play on snooker tables as opposed to eight or nine ball tables. The correct cloth for a snooker table has a directional nap (kind of like the effect of velvet... if you brush it one way it raises up, the other way, it lays flat), while the cloth on an eight or n

  • What's really needed is... (Score:5, Funny)

    by andy666 (666062) on Saturday August 07 2004, @05:11AM (#9907662)
    a pool CLEANING robot.

    or at least something that can clean for me.
    • I know this was a joke.. but they really do exist.

      In fact, there is one cleaning my pool right now. Depending on the design, it may or may not work very well -- mine uses the suction of the pump system to generate a "jerking motion", which moves the vacuum around the bottom. It, however, tends to go in predictable patterns (moving the hose around helps a bit) and stirs up a lot of the dirt before sucking it up.

      Mine is similar to this model. [epinions.com]

    • or at least something that can clean for me.

      I'd say a woman, but...

      ;)

  • Far simpler? In ways... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by danamania (540950) on Saturday August 07 2004, @05:13AM (#9907663)
    A Canadian scientist has created another game-playing machine, designed for a far simpler purpose than chess: playing pool.

    Far simpler perhaps, in ways. The strategy behind a pool game might be easier compared to chess, but there's nothing physical in chess that needs simulating. That's a whole new ball game (ha!) for a computer/robot over a chess simulation.

    This looks up there with the research into teaching robots to walk, scale stairs & run. Good solid research sure, but I wouldn't go putting it down by comparing it to a chess simulation.

    • Less Recognition (Score:5, Interesting)

      by mfh (56) on Saturday August 07 2004, @05:24AM (#9907695) Journal
      Also there is less recognition for shots in pool because strategies are different compared to where you play. The base rules system is easier than chess, but you have near-infinite possibilities for aligning shots, taking shots and winning. If you're playing someone who can sink the table on a streak, the robot had better be able to do the same. Plus there's breaking... does the bot know how to break a rack and sink a couple each time? If not, it's not a very good pool bot, whereas it doesn't take much these days to create a chess bot that is *amazing* at chess by even pro standards. They have all the stats from previous games to go by. Stats won't help a robot with billiards, as there are no coordinates recorded to base new calulations on. Perhaps there *should* be? I think it would be fairly easy to record coords from each pro game from this day forward and the billiards industry should invent a table that does it. That would be awesome for so many reasons.

      • Re:Less Recognition (Score:5, Interesting)

        by danamania (540950) on Saturday August 07 2004, @05:32AM (#9907707)
        Stats won't help a robot with billiards, as there are no coordinates recorded to base new calulations on. Perhaps there *should* be? I think it would be fairly easy to record coords from each pro game from this day forward and the billiards industry should invent a table that does it. That would be awesome for so many reasons.

        On top of the stats like this - not every pool table is identical. Chess is purely a logical game, where the table in pool may differ according to how old the table is, the humidity, the air pressure, temperature, how clean your balls are, the cue tip (chalking anyone?).

        You might have a robot that can be perfect at a game played on a known surface, but that'll only be the one table it's built for. That's where having the bot work as an adaptable machine would come into play.
        • > how clean your balls are

          Mine are pretty clean. How about yours?
    • You are kidding, right? Walking, running, and climbing stairs require much more than simply striking a cue ball with a cue, even if you include using english on the ball.

  • Chalk (Score:5, Funny)

    by pjt33 (739471) on Saturday August 07 2004, @05:16AM (#9907677)
    At last: a pool opponent who doesn't spend the entire match distracting you by chalking their cue!
    • At last: a pool opponent who doesn't spend the entire match distracting you by chalking their cue!

      But what if he constantly distracts you with small talk, and he sounds just like Stephen Hawking?

  • Vs Humans (Score:3, Funny)

    by ubera (107426) <oconnoat@@@tcd...ie> on Saturday August 07 2004, @05:21AM (#9907689) Homepage
    I wonder if it will be able to beat Kasparov?
  • Ofcourse you have...
    Interesting question: could you ever be truly happy with a 'copy-cat' human-like robot (or dog, cat) as a partner/friend, that looks like, smells like, behaves like a real human?

    Personally, I will always prefer the real thing, flesh and blood, but a good copy could be fun company...

    • Interesting question: could you ever be truly happy with a 'copy-cat' human-like robot (or dog, cat) as a partner/friend, that looks like, smells like, behaves like a real human?

      Yeah, I think so. If it behaves the same, does it matter if it's artificial?

      Personally, I'd be pretty damn pleased even if all it ever said was 'chii!'

  • Sucky robots (Score:5, Funny)

    by Zorilla (791636) on Saturday August 07 2004, @05:27AM (#9907699)
    Now they only need to make a robot that sucks at golf. Of course, important aspects of the design will include a synthesized "FUCK! God DAMMIT! Stupid fucking sandtrap!" on 50% of shots made.
    • Now they only need to make a robot that sucks at golf.

      Ask an ye shall recieve. Lego golf robots. [www.hh.se]

      .
    • Now they only need to make a robot that sucks at golf. Of course, important aspects of the design will include a synthesized "FUCK! God DAMMIT! Stupid fucking sandtrap!" on 50% of shots made.

      Don't forget the helicopter-style club launcher that can hurl a 3 wood further than the ball you just shanked.

  • I know that some engineers at my Uni (Adelaide University) made the same kind of thing a few years back. I don't know too many details (or a webpage), but it was about as good as this one appears to be.
  • Where's the 'aimjuice' aka beer intakes on this baby? Not to mention, does it smoke and enjoy country music as well? What about karaoke!?

    ALL IM ASKING IS THAT IT PARTICIPATE WITH THE REST OF US HUMANS.

    Mod me down as robot-insensitive.

  • Horizon snooker robot (Score:5, Informative)

    by rjforster (2130) on Saturday August 07 2004, @05:45AM (#9907740) Journal
    Any British /.ers remember a Horizon[1] episode where they built a snooker playing robot. Must have been 10/15 years ago now. Played on a reduced size table with fewer balls (10 rather than 15 reds IIRC). The gantry for the robo-cue included steel pillars at the corners of the table, thus making it really hard for the human competitor.

    [1] Horizon is a science program on BBC2.
    • Like the other replier, I think it was longer than 15 years. More like 20 years I would say.

      And I'm sure I saw it on Tomorrows World not Horizon. Maybe the presenters were the same and I'm not remembering correctly.

      I do remember a huge flow-diagram that was used to help program the code; a huge roll of paper that covered a whole wall. I've written webpages with more logic than that... :)

    • The world's first snooker playing robot was the subject of a QED programme shown on 16th March 1988 on BBC TV in which the 1988 world snooker champion, Steve Davis, played and won a match against the robot. I helped to develop the image-processing software for the robot's vision system. The research project ran from 1986-1988 and was funded by BBC TV. There is further information about the project here. [slashdot.org]
    • Yeah, I remember that.

      Snooker's a much harder game than pool, since the table is larger, the pockets smaller, and there's more balls on the table to start with. The robot on Horizon could actually play a real game, following the rules or snooker, and making intelligent shots with positioning.

      From the article it sounds like this pool playing robot is pretty crummy right now. They hilight its strength as being able to pot the white in any pocket, but make it clear that it has trouble potting any coloured
      • You forgot to metion that Huey, Duey and Louie on Valley Forge also made far better gardeners than any snooker/pool playing robot ever would. Well, one of them did by the end of the film, the others probably would have too, given the chance.
        I'd have really been put in my place by that had you thought to mention it.
  • to use genetic algorithms to improve the robocue efficiency?

    Maybe toss in a little fuzzy logic for good measure.

  • linux (Score:2, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    But does it run linux?

  • Simpler eh? (Score:5, Informative)

    by Rosco P. Coltrane (209368) on Saturday August 07 2004, @06:13AM (#9907803)
    designed for a far simpler purpose than chess: playing pool.

    This comment shows the poster has no idea what playing pool is about.

    It's more than just line up / aim at the center of the ball / shoot more or less hard : you have to pot the ball, yes, but you also have to replace your white ball so that the next shot is easier. Often you have to think 2, 3, 4 shots ahead. Often you plan your entire game before playing the first shot.

    In order to control the white ball, there's a certain about of spin to give it on the vertical plan and horizontal plan (english) so that the ball is deflected differently on the cushion(s), depending on the angle they arrive. Giving english to a ball also deflect its path (it won't roll straight), so that has to be accounted for in the aiming (you aim a little off). And then all tables don't react the same, some have newer, less "grabby" cloths than others... Then there's the roughness of the cue tie and the chalk, and the suppleness of the cue's wood that affects greatly how much english is put on the ball. Then of course there are all the "special" shots, like massés, that require a lot of practive to control... etc...

    Playing pool is a LOT more complex than chess, and that's not just because it involves real physics. The problem has many many variables, and it takes many years of practice to master. I've been playing for 20 years, at least 2 hours per day, and I still couldn't beat a professional. It's a very demanding game.
    • I agree with the parent.Sometimes a shot is played not to pot a ball but TO DENY IT TO YOUR OPPONENT.That why those soft touches to park the cue ball right where the other chap can't do a thing.

      Pool/Snooker are all about strategy.Any one, who watched the semifinals of this year's snooker championship when Ronnie O'Sullivan came back to win brilliantly,knows what I am talking about.

    • I've been playing for 20 years, at least 2 hours per day

      Man, where do you find the time to still read slashdot?

    • Re:Simpler eh? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Kjella (173770) on Saturday August 07 2004, @08:49AM (#9908173) Homepage
      I assume that "simpler" in this context means to find a winning set of (reasonably possible) shots. That is not really that hard, it is the skills to make the shots that is incredibly difficult.

      I suspect that the computer would do extremely well on a "perfect" board - single uniform friction coefficient, perfectly level, perfectly straight edges, perfectly chalked cue every time, perfectly accurate aiming mechanism and so on.

      The biggest challenge is to deal with the imperfections of the real world. If the computer could have a simple look-up table of input velocity, direction and magnitude of the english -> output velocity, direction and magnitude of the english (for edges and ball-ball contact) + some simple calculations of (potentially curved) lines, I think I could program up a quite good one fast.

      It'd do great in simulations, but still suck in the real world.

      Kjella
    • I would have to disagree with you here. Even without mastering spin and such like given a high enough degree of accuracy it is likely that a very good execution plan could be calculated.

      I think the real issue here is firstly getting the vision system coupled with the actual physical movement in an accurate enough manner.

      In some ways this game is much smaller than chess, although you may say that there are infinite variations and whatnot you forget that we already understand the physics of the pool tab

      • Even without mastering spin and such like given a high enough degree of accuracy it is likely that a very good execution plan could be calculated.

        Unless spin and the like are mastered a great many execution plans are removed from the realm of possibility. There are fundamentally two things that separate pro level players from amateurs: Planning and cue ball control. Planning is a lot easier to learn than cue ball control, since you simply have to know whats possible. Executing that plan requires a very, v

      • Re:Simpler eh? (Score:2, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        You're only better than 75% of all pool players? Christ, you suck at pool.

        I play once a year, always in a different state. I usually intentionally miscue three or four times a game to allow the poor schlub I'm playing a little hope. I only use warped house cues with no tip and try to find a table with wrinkled felt and plenty of bare patches. I laugh at the professionals who whine that they only lost to me because of the beer puddle on the table. Pool is about playing the conditions.

        I've never played in a

  • *YAWN* (Score:5, Funny)

    by Chineseyes (691744) on Saturday August 07 2004, @06:28AM (#9907835)
    Deep Blue now Deep Green *YAWN* someone wake me up when we see Deep Pink the nympho robot.
  • Deep Green pots only half the shots it plans for - supposedly the same as a below average player - but this is expected to improve.

    My pool playing is likewise below average, except when I've had a few pints and I start clearing tables. No, I don't understand it either. Do you think the robot would play better if somebody tipped a pint of beer over it?

    • Re:C2H5OH (Score:5, Funny)

      by Jeremy Erwin (2054) on Saturday August 07 2004, @06:51AM (#9907884) Journal

      RIMMER: How many of those are you going to drink?
      LISTER: I told you not to talk. Game on.
      RIMMER: You're going to drink an entire six-pack of wicked-strength
      lager?
      LISTER: I'm not gonna get plastered, Rimmer, just ... just nicely drunk.
      RIMMER: Define "nicely drunk." Is "nicely drunk" horizontal or perpendicular?
      LISTER: Rimmer, I can handle it.
      KRYTEN: I'm not sure I can.
      LISTER: We're in the wrong position. It's an easier shot if we go over here. (He moves into the "better" position and lines up the shot.)
      RIMMER: But that's right in the orbital path of the planet! If you miss, we're going to get a planet in the face.
      LISTER: I'm not gonna mish.
      RIMMER: "Mish?"
      LISTER: What?
      RIMMER: You said "mish." "I'm not gonna mish," you said. You've only had two cans and you're steaming!
      LISTER: Rimmer, will you relax? I know what I'm doing! I am not pished!


      --From "Whitehole", Red Dwarf, Series 4
    • I've seen this happen with a number of people. I'm guessing that having the alcohol in your system makes you relax, which improves your stroke and follow-through. A lot of people hold the cue much too tightly and try to control their stroke way too much, resulting in a stilted, unnatural motion - remove these impediments and it's quite possible that your shooting will get better.
  • An average player will miss 3 out of 4 shots. But most average players don't play that much.
  • Q: What's green, and if it falls out of a tree and lands on you it could kill you?

    A: A pool table.
  • This has been done before to some degree with a robot called Iron Willie [allsportsbid.com] by a company called Predator whom used the robot to create low deflection cues and empirically measure how "accurate" cue designs were. Predator Cues [predatorcues.com] are to pool what high dollar putters are to golf. These cues utilize a pie wedge design in the shaft combined with a stiff taper and lightweight, short ferrule to decrease deflection and maximize energy transfer to the cueball. Many people report a 10-20 percent improvement when they s

  • Thank god its the weekend..... (Score:4, Interesting)

    by idfrsr (560314) on Saturday August 07 2004, @11:54AM (#9908942)

    Goodness... our poor server may survive....

    I must admit that is pleasing to have our project on slashdot. It's been a fun project and is getting me a M.Sc out of it :P. Having a pool table in your lab is a lot of fun on friday afternoons.

    For those /.'s interested the robot should be playing a game entirely on its own in the spring. We are still very much in the early stages of development, but we have made lots of progress over the last 16 months from when the gantry was delivered.

  • OK, not that anyone will care... But the name "Deep Green" is already taken. Deep Green [planetnewton.com] is a Chess app for the Newton, and up until somewhat recently, was the best PDA Chess app around.

    So there. :)

  • I, Pool Shark (Score:5, Funny)

    by Gigantic1 (630697) on Saturday August 07 2004, @04:08PM (#9910075)
    Supposedly the Robot makes only about half it's shots: Don't believe it folks. The robot is missing those shots on purpose - "laying down" - until the money gets right, and then it will start to hustle.

    Hey...I watched the "The Color of Money" starrring Ton Cruise and Paul Neuman - I know all about Pool Hustlng.

    • "Let's play the adding game. Which can add faster, a calculator or a woman or a man?"

      That depends on who gets to start first ;).

      Seriously though if the questions come from a human it may be faster if the human comes up with the answers immediately rather than output them slowly (and possibly erroneously) to a machine and then get the answers.

      So a human with a wearable computer+cam that automatically totals numbers "in a blink of an eye" could be faster than a calculator. e.g. look at top left of area con
    • Majors props for the Moxy Fruvous reference....:) If there's a transcript of that whole exchange it would be pertinent here....:)

      -Tom

    • As long as the bot has one foot on the floor, it's still legal. :-)
    • Not necessarily. Making a good shot in pool requires more than just lining up a shot and hitting the cue ball into another ball. The cue ball often times needs to be hit with the proper left/right/top/bottom spin ("English") so that it rolls into a spot where there is another shot. The best place to hit the cue ball would be very difficult to calculate with an overhead view.

      If you watch professionals play, you'll notice their stance is such that their chins are almost touching their cue stick, and the stic

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.