Appendix A: Computational Model

Figure 1:
Figure 1 is an image of an environment map that is generated with the same parameters that we used when we ran all of our tests. Dirt tiles are represented by a “=” mark. Stone is represented by a “/” mark. Water is represented by a “w” and danger is represented by a “D”

Figure 2:
Figure 2 shows three different map type generations. The differences being in the percent of danger tiles being generated. This mapping was done so that it showed only danger tiles unlike the previous mapping. The far left shows a map generated with 4% danger tile generation which is what we finally used for our model. The middle shows 10% danger generation. The far right box shows a 25% danger tile generation which is what the model originally used.

Appendix B: Data

Figure 1:
This figure shows the percentage of the times when there was success or failure during the 50 trials that we conducted in the quality test. As you can see, the haptics had a lot more success than the non-haptics.

Figure 2:
Figure 2 Shows the time until success of non-haptics and haptics tests. As can be seen in the data, the haptics tests are almost always much faster than the non-haptics runs. The trials being compared to each other are of the robot running on the same environment.