An autonomous robot uses sensor information and a program to decide some actions. Autonomy has a scope: it depends on perception, mechanisms and anticipated situations. Our mission takes place on a bounded track with a load and model obstacles. Describing starting position, route, destination and stopping conditions makes the result testable. Reaching the end is insufficient if the robot touches an obstacle or continues when it should stop.

A mobile base moves its whole body; an arm may move tools within a workspace. Useful classification connects function, environment and contact with people rather than appearance alone. An industrial robot and a service robot may share components while needing different supervision. The school prototype demonstrates one part of a social application, such as moving an object along a known route. It does not demonstrate navigation everywhere or personal-care capabilities. Define an out-of-scope condition too, so you can recognise when to interrupt a trial and review the mission.

Line sensors provide information about the surface underneath the robot. Their response to reflected light depends on material, gloss, height and lighting. Depending on the equipment, this information appears as a number or an already processed state. Neither means ‘robot centred’ by itself: that interpretation comes from relating readings to known positions. A pattern combines information from several sensors and describes what the assembly observes in a particular situation.

Characterisation relates these patterns to the robot being centred, offset to either side and off the line, before movement decisions are made. This explains why some readings can guide a correction while others cannot distinguish position sufficiently. If two situations requiring different actions produce the same pattern, the program lacks the information needed to tell them apart. Reviewing track width, placement or selected sensors may provide an observable difference; adding code conditions does not create that physical distinction.

Checking the track in this way is different from recalibrating the sensor internally. Maqueen Plus V2 comes factory-calibrated, and incorrect recalibration can impair detection. That adjustment is reserved for the exact version’s procedure, when appropriate and reviewed by the teacher. Another model’s meanings for black and white cannot be transferred automatically either. The readings table documents what our robot recognises and supports the actions that must subsequently be checked in motion.

Priorities determine which decision takes precedence when several conditions occur together. A robot can recognise a usable line and detect an obstacle at the same time; both readings can be correct. Basic control addresses manual stop or invalid data first, then obstacles, then line loss, and finally forward movement or correction. A chain of mutually exclusive cases lets the priority decision prevent a later movement branch from running.

Exclusion matters because independent commands can contradict one another within the same cycle. Calculating a single motor decision and applying it at the end makes the intended action clear. The screen message communicates that decision, while movement shows whether it was applied. Distance-based decisions also require the unit and the meanings of special values in the extension being used. An absent echo does not automatically mean a clear route. The workshop proposes stopping at 15 cm or less as a reference to be checked on the track.

The response does not necessarily occur at the instant of the reading. Instructions run between measurement and action, and the robot may keep moving during that interval. Higher speed or a longer wait can increase the distance travelled before responding; the distance reference is therefore not a universal guarantee. Cycles without long pauses allow new conditions to be checked more continuously. Besides deciding when to stop, the design states how the mission is left and what allows it to restart.

A base with two driven wheels changes direction by changing the relative movement of its sides. A block’s speed command is usually a control value, not a measured physical speed. Results also depend on load, battery, friction and robot version. Identify front, left wheel and right wheel from the robot’s own perspective. This reference prevents reversed corrections when viewing the track from another side or changing your working position.

Connect each recorded pattern with advance or gentle correction and test its effect before integration. A reading does not impose a universal turn: sensor position and line width matter. Excessive correction can cross to the other edge and create zigzagging. Begin with moderate settings, check direction and change one parameter at a time. When the line is lost, the basic design stops and waits for the planned repositioning or restart. Automatic searching would be another strategy requiring its own limits and tests, and must not appear undocumented.

A reproducible trial describes how it was performed so another pair can repeat it. Record track, starting position, load, settings, battery and relevant surface and lighting conditions. Run at least three journeys with each compared configuration. Results include mission success, contact, line loss, failure location and, if relevant to the question, time. Fast arrival with a collision still fails the requirement even if it improves a secondary number in the record.

Comparison aims to understand a cause rather than present the best attempt alone. Change one parameter, keep others fixed and repeat the same series. If a condition could not be maintained, declare it as a limitation. Three trials show repetition on that track but do not guarantee operation everywhere or universal reliability. Define an acceptable improvement beforehand: fewer line losses without worsening stopping, for example. Keep failures and observations to explain why an option deserves another test rather than attributing every difference to the last edited block.

A service robot performs useful tasks within a context of use. Its value depends on audience, function, interaction and limitations rather than human appearance. Big Hero 6 invites questions about how an assistance system perceives, decides and acts. A scene provides observations from fiction; it does not demonstrate technical capability or emotional understanding. Separate what the story shows, your interpretation and a claim requiring a source before it can be considered verified.

AV01 is integrated into the twelve sessions: 0.25 for preparation, 2.25 for authorised viewing or a coherent selection, and 1 for comparison and transfer. You may use description and guided reading of the same problem without viewing outside class. Record three observations without transcribing dialogue and check one claim against technical documentation. Turn a useful function into a small Maqueen requirement, such as communicating a stop and enabling supervision. Include the conclusion in A01 and its application in A02; this creates neither a third assignment nor a medical device.

The laboratory connects perception, control, mechanism and power. A sensor supplies distance or a pattern; micro:bit decides; the motor interface applies a command; wheels and surface produce the journey. Drawing this map locates different causes of the same symptom. If the robot turns towards an obstacle, the reading, priority or motor mapping may be wrong. Observing input, final decision and movement separately supports investigation without changing every part.

A01 includes mission, justified components, states, priorities, predictions and a physical micro-execution. A02 integrates the robot, three comparable journeys, a corrected fault and individual explanation. States such as stopped, tracking or facing an obstacle need clear transitions: entering stopped does not itself explain how restarting works. A starts and B stops in the workshop, with restart behaviour declared. Evidence includes a functional mechanical diagram and material reuse. Simulation may support logical reasoning, but physical tracking and stopping results are documented using the actual robot version.

The robot version is part of the technical explanation. Maqueen Lite, Plus V1 and Plus V2 tutorials may share ideas without guaranteeing identical extensions, sensors or connections. Manufacturer documentation identifies model, library and procedure. Before reusing a block, check its function, unit and special-result meanings. A similar photograph or abbreviated name is insufficient to decide compatibility or select internal calibration procedures.

Reasoned adaptation distinguishes structure from parameters. The chain prioritising stop may remain on another track, while line patterns, control speed and distance reference require fresh verification. A tighter bend calls for investigating whether the robot still obtains information in time and can correct without losing the track. Optional videos review movement with pauses and written support. Record their version and the question they answer. Extending obstacle diversion requires its own states, recovery and tests; it does not silently replace basic stopping or authorise testing outside the bounded space.