Running Slides – our Progress
MRSD Capstone — Running Slides
Reports
- Conceptual Design Review
- Spring Test Plan
- Critical Design Review Report
- Fall Test Plan
- Final Report
Presentations
- Preliminary Design Review
- Critical Design Review
- Spring Validation Demo
- Standards and Regulations
Progress Reviews – Spring Semester
Progress Reviews – Fall Semester
- Progress Review 7
- Progress Review 8
- Progress Review 9
- Progress Review 10
Individual Lab Reports (ILR)
| ILR\Team Member | Alina Wang | Neha Kayiti | Istan Slamet | Sean Min | Shuyi Lin |
| ILR01 | ILR01 | ILR01 | ILR01 | ILR01 | ILR01 |
| ILR02 | ILR02 | ILR02 | ILR02 | ILR02 | ILR02 |
| ILR03 | ILR03 | ILR03 | ILR03 | ILR03 | ILR03 |
| ILR04 | ILR04 | ILR04 | ILR04 | ILR04 | ILR04 |
| ILR05 | ILR05 | ILR05 | ILR05 | ILR05 | ILR05 |
| ILR06 | ILR06 | ILR06 | ILR06 | ILR06 | ILR06 |
| ILR07 | ILR07 | ILR07 | ILR07 | ILR07 | ILR07 |
| ILR08 | ILR08 | ILR08 | ILR08 | ILR08 | ILR08 |
| ILR09 | ILR09 | ILR09 | ILR09 | ILR09 | ILR09 |
| ILR10 | ILR10 | ILR10 | ILR10 | ILR10 | ILR10 |
Software
This is the github link to access Project Canopy’s software code.
Drawings, Schematics, and Datasheets
Electrical
Mechanical
Component Testing & Experiment Results
Pot Detection Model Unit-Test
We trained two YOLO models for pot detection, YOLO11n and YOLO11s, which differ in the number of model parameters. We evaluated the model prediction accuracy on a test set consisting of 97 images containing 359 pot instances.
As shown in the table below, both models achieve strong performance on the evaluation set. To further reduce false positives during deployment, we apply a confidence threshold, which may slightly increase missed detections but improves overall reliability.
Pot Detection Model Accuracy
| Metric | YOLO11n Result | YOLO11s Result |
| mAP@50 | 0.955 | 0.956 |
| mAP@50-95 | 0.877 | 0.881 |
| Precision | 0.940 | 0.944 |
| Recall | 0.922 | 0.931 |
GPS Localization Static Open-Sky Unit-Test
We evaluated the GNSS-RTK localization subsystem under static open-sky conditions to measure position stability. The robot remained stationary while GPS position data was collected and converted into local Cartesian coordinates. This test evaluates localization repeatability and sensor jitter, rather than absolute global position accuracy.
As shown in the table below, the GNSS-RTK module produced highly stable position estimates. The total 2D position stayed within 0.73 cm of the average position, and the RMS variation was 0.28 cm. These results show that the localization subsystem provides stable input for autonomous navigation and planting location estimation.
GPS Localization Static Open-Sky Unit-Test Results
| Metric | X (cm) | Y (cm) | Total 2D (cm) |
| Max horizontal drift | 0.63 | 0.56 | 0.73 |
| Total position range | 1.25 | 1.10 | 1.66 |
| RMS variation | 0.23 | 0.16 | 0.28 |
The low drift and RMS variation indicate that the GNSS-RTK subsystem is stable enough to support the project requirement of identifying planting locations within 1 m precision.
