Student's Robot Obliterates 4x4 Rubik's Cube World Record (bbc.com)
- Reference: 0177490391
- News link: https://hardware.slashdot.org/story/25/05/13/213239/students-robot-obliterates-4x4-rubiks-cube-world-record
- Source link: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgnlvevj5ro
> A student's robot has [1]beaten the world record for solving a four-by-four Rubik's cube -- by 33 seconds. Matthew Pidden, a 22-year-old University of Bristol student, built and trained the "Revenger" over 15 weeks for his computer science bachelor's degree. The robot solved the cube in 45.305 seconds, obliterating the world record of 1 minute 18 seconds. However, the human record for solving the cube is 15.71 seconds.
>
> Mr Pidden's robot uses dual webcams to scan the cube, a custom mechanism to manipulate the faces, and a fully self-built solving algorithm to generate efficient solutions. The student now plans to study for a master's degree in robotics at Imperial College London.
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgnlvevj5ro
The current record is 15.7 seconds... (Score:1)
This was 16+... and is not the current record on video. Humans have beaten this number on video since 2019.
Re: (Score:1)
Source and Video = [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yApZR-TQ6ZQ
Re: (Score:1)
Ahh.. Robot record... got it...
What is the current challenge? (Score:2)
Why is the robot much slower than the fastest human? Is the problem that each robot turn is slower or that the algorithm for determining the sequence of turns comes up with longer sequences? I'm guessing that the problem is the relative slowness of each robot turn. If the robot turns could be done really fast, say at 1/10th the speed of the fastest human, then the turn sequence length becomes irrelevant.
However, I imagine that if a high priority and unlimited funds were devoted to building a fast-turn ro
Re: (Score:2)
Partly it is the speed of the robot. By comparing the BBC video against human-cubers on youtube, you can see this robot is relatively sedate. (Still fast in absolute terms, but slow compared to human moves.) Moreover, this robot is, shall we say, single-threaded. It can only execute a single move at a time. Human cubers will often use all their fingers to execute more than one move at once.
If you built a robot that could do the (single-threaded) moves 10x as fast as a human, you'd actually have to s
The only way that I can solve a Rubik's cube ... (Score:2)
is to peel off the coloured squares and put them back - one colour per face. This, unfortunately, takes more than 15.71 seconds.
Re: (Score:2)
It isn't that hard to solve a 3x3x3 Rubik's cube. It just takes some practice and some algorithms.
Technically you only need to learn a [1]single algorithm [rider.biz]: R U R' U' .
But it is best to learn at least T-Perm and Ja-Perm.
Alternatively, there is also the [2]Old Pochman Method [speedcubereview.com] for solving a cube blindfolded:
For corners
* Altered Y Permutation: (R U' R' U') R U R' F' (R U R' U') R' F R
For Edges
* J Permutation: (R U R' F') (R U R' U') R' F R2 (U' R' U')
* T Permutation: (R U R' U') R' F R2 (U' R' U' R) U R' F'
[1] https://cube.rider.biz/beginner.php
[2] https://www.speedcubereview.com/blind-solving-algorithms.html
Re: (Score:2)
When I was a kid - I'd take the rubik's cube apart and reassemble in the correct order.
Lame (Score:2)
It should have done it with a humanoid hand, that would advance the field more. Right now robot hands are terrible and can't even do very basic dextrous tasks.
Re: (Score:2)
> It should have done it with a humanoid hand, that would advance the field more. Right now robot hands are terrible and can't even do very basic dextrous tasks.
Did you watch the video? This is an application were a non-humanoid hand has clear superiority. His manipulator design is spot-on.
The limiting factor was that his motors weren't fast enough: the linear positioning of the hands was much slower than I can imagine is possible, and the rotation speed, while better, was still slower than I'd expect. With bigger stepper motors, I would easily expect his design to go twice as fast and be in the realm of human speed. Faster than that might take substantial addit
Re: (Score:2)
It also looks like he didn't shorten the wires to the stepper motors at all, meaning he may have found he could not reliably drive them faster than he did, a problem which could have been addressed by cutting them to proper length and ensuring the driver circuitry was up to the task of dumping massive currents to move the rotors quickly and absorbing massive flyback spikes when breaking the circuit. It also wasn't clear that he was using any advanced techniques for stepper motors, like ramping up and down
Getting it out of the box (Score:1)
Takes me more than 45 seconds LOL
Thought it was 0.38 seconds? (Score:2)
[1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?... [youtube.com]
[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nt00QzKuNVY
One Question (Score:2)
Is the start position always the same? Or some are easier to solve than others?
4x4? (Score:2)
Or 4x4x4
Re: (Score:2)
It's one cube of the 4x4x4x4 hyperrubiks.
Re: (Score:2)
I know 4x4x1 exist, but most folks that are not deep into cubing will say 2x2, 3x3 and 4x4 even if they mean 2x2x2 3x3x3 and 4x4x4.
[1]https://rubiks-cube-design.sho... [rubiks-cube-design.shop]
I'm no expert cuber, my record is under 1m with a 3x3x3 cube. The newer models with magnets are really nice to play with, but I have not solved one since the confinement era.
[1] https://rubiks-cube-design.shop/product/4x4-magic-cube/
Re: (Score:2)
Do they really call the non-cubic toys cubes?
Re: (Score:2)
4x4 is an off-road Rubik's Cube.