 |
 |
Updates |
|
 
Last update: 10 August 2009
|
General information |
|
The seminar
Path Planning is given as a part of the GMT
Master program at the Utrecht University.
The course is given in the 4th period on Monday (13.15-15.00) and Thursday
(11.00-12.45) in BBL-501.
|
Course overview |
|
Path planning plays an important role in computer games and virtual environments.
Characters in such environments have to plan their paths to move from one
location to another. These paths must avoid collisions with the environment and
with other characters. Also it is important that these paths are natural, that
is, they look similar to paths humans would take. In this seminar we will study
a number of the recent results on path planning and crowd simulation.
|
Schedule
The presentations in the following schedule have been removed :-) |
| Week |
Date |
Topic |
Paper |
Speaker |
Deadline |
| 17 |
April 20 |
Introduction |
|
Mark Overmars |
|
| |
April 23 |
Current problems |
|
Everyone |
Assignment 1 |
| 18 |
April 27 |
No seminar |
|
|
|
| |
April 30 |
No seminar |
|
|
|
| 19 |
May 4 |
CMM |
0, 1, 2 |
Roland Geraerts |
Abstracts |
| |
May 7 |
Path planning |
3, 4 |
Wiratma,
Weijermans |
Abstracts |
| 20 |
May 11 |
Path planning |
5, 6 |
Tromp,
Toxopeus |
Abstracts |
| |
May 14 |
PP/Social force models |
7, 8 |
Spoel,
Peters |
Abstracts |
| 21 |
May 18 |
Social force models |
9, 10 |
Kok,
Doornenbal |
Abstracts |
| |
May 21 |
No seminar |
|
|
|
| 22 |
May 25 |
Social force models |
11, 12 |
Demir,
Wiratma |
Abstracts |
| |
May 28 |
SFM, Flow |
13, 14 |
Anantharam,
Albers |
Abstracts |
| 23 |
June 1 |
No seminar |
|
|
|
| |
June 4 |
No seminar |
|
|
|
| 24 |
June 8 |
Flow |
15, 16 |
Weijermans, Tromp |
Abstracts |
| |
June 11 |
Flow/Crowds |
17, 18 |
Toxopeus, Spoel |
Abstracts |
| 25 |
June 15 |
Crowds |
19, 20 |
Peters, Kok |
Abstracts |
| |
June 18 |
No seminar |
|
|
|
| 26 |
June 22 |
Crowd behavior |
21, 22 |
Doornenbal, Demir |
Abstracts |
| |
June 25 |
Crowd rendering |
23, 24 |
Anantharam, Albers |
Abstracts |
| 27 |
July 3 |
No seminar |
|
|
Assignment 2 |
|
Assignments |
|
To develop some insights about current problems and challenges in the field of
path planning, you will be studying a game in the first assignment. Next, you
have to write a short document for each paper that will be discussed. Each
student will discuss two papers. At the end of the seminar, you have to create
and hand in a paper on how some interesting problems can be solved.
|
Assignment 1 |
|
In the first assignment you have to collect some footage from a game in which
path planning issues went dramatically wrong. These issues include general path
planning, crowd planning and camera planning. While some examples can be found
on the web (see for example these
path finding
bugs or even better
this overview
[pdf]), you need to create the
footage yourself. You can use
Fraps to capture a relevant part. If that fails you could use a
(web/photo/film) camera to record a piece. Next, take a representative picture
of it and put it, together with a short discussion of what went wrong and how it
could be fixed, onto three PowerPoint slides. The movie and slides must be
handed in on April 23 at the start of the meeting. Your work will be
discussed during this meeting.
|
Abstracts |
|
For each paper presentation (starting at May 4), except for your own
presentations, you have to write a 1 page document including a short summary in
your own words, some challenges, shortcomings, suprising and innovative
elements, and a few relevant questions of the paper. (For May 4, write a 2 page
document). A printed copy must be handed in at the start of the presentation.
|
Assignment 2 |
|
The goal of the second assignment is to write a document on how the techniques
that you have seen during the seminar can be used to solve path planning and
crowd simulation problems in actual games. In the
first assignment you have all created videos of problems with path planning
in games. From these we have selected the most interesting/relevant issues:
- Unnatural crowd movements in Warcraft III: Reign of Chaos; see Pieter’s
contribution.
- Unnatural global behavior in Resident Evil 4; see Cetin’s contribution.
- Unnatural local path planning/steering in Halo; see Geerten’s
contribution.
For each of these three issues you need to write a 5-page document describing how
you think the problems can be solved or at least improved using the techniques
that have been discussed during this seminar. (So the total document should be
15 pages in length.) You should write the paper as if it was meant as a
recommendation for the programmer of the game. So it should have enough details
to convince the programmer that this is a good idea and that he should
investigate the approach further. Explain the problems you observe, give a
global description of the techniques you suggest for improvement, and indicate
why you think they would solve the problems. Give references to the papers from
which you have taken the techniques. In your writing assume that the reader has
a good knowledge of computer science but no knowledge of the techniques
discussed in the seminar.
This paper must be mailed to
Roland preferrably before or on July 3 at 18.00. Since this is a
strict deadline, make sure you start in time. Note that you do not need papers
23 and 24 for this assignment.
|
Presentations of research papers |
|
Each student will be assigned two research papers which have to be presented. A
PC and projector will be present. When you're preparing your presentation, do it
in such a way that people who don't know the paper (but have a computer science
background) can still follow your presentation. So, explain the algorithms and
definitions clearly and give some examples. Also, do not put too much text on
your slides. If you are displaying charts or tables, please explain all axes,
legend, etc. You're of course free to steal additional information (such as
movies and java applets) from the Internet. Try to speak for about 30 minutes.
The remainder (15 minutes) should be used for discussions. The following papers
are discussed.
|
|
|
Grading |
|
There will be no exam but grading will depend on the quality of the given
presentations (40%), the first assignment (5%), the second assignment (25%),
abstracts (20%), and the active participation in the meetings (10%). To qualify
for second change exam the original mark should at least be a 4. Also you must
actively participate in at least 75% of the meetings and give both presentations
satisfactory.
|
Teachers |
|
For additional information about the seminar, please contact
Roland Geraerts or Mark
Overmars.
|
|
|
|