Second Q A's BAA 11-14

1/6/2011

DARPA BAA 11-14 Q&A

The questions listed below include those posed at the 12 November Industry Day event as well as those submitted to the BAA email address. Where possible, similar questions have been combined (the text of the original question has been preserved, however) and a single response provided. Questions and responses are grouped into two general categories: Contractual/Programmatic and Technical.

Contractual/Programmatic:

Question Response

U Paragraph 4.4.2 Proposal Format (page 18) specifies:

A four slide summary of the proposal in PowerPoint that quickly and succinctly indicates the concept overview, key innovations, expected impact, and other unique aspects of the proposal. The format for the summary slides is included in APPENDIX 1 to this BAA and does not count against the page limit.

But Appendix 1 shows only three slides, which are titled differently.

Slide 1. Concept (describe how it works/innovative claims Slide 2. Contract/Proposal Specifics (intellectual property, data rights summary, and deliverables)

Schedule/Cost (base, option 1, option 2, program total)

Which does DARPA require for the proposal - 3 slides or 4 slides and slide titles matching Paragraph 4.4.2 of Appendix 1?

Please provide only 3 slides, in accordance with the example shown in Appendix 1.

V On page 21 of the BAA, the BAA requires that we provide a detailed cost proposal for our work as a major subcontractor, to be submitted as part of the prime's proposal. The BAA goes on to state that the prime may submit this detailed subcontractor cost proposal in a "sealed envelope." A sealed envelope would be good of course, because while we gladly share the costs of all of our work with the prime, we don't expose our company private rates and factors with anyone outside the government, and these rates and factors are exposed in a detailed cost proposal.

However, a sealed envelope won't work since the government is requiring that offerings under this BAA be submitted electronically. So how do you want us to handle this matter?

Supplemental material, such as subcontractor cost proposals, may be sent in hardcopy form. Please send material to:

DARPA/STO

ATTN: DARPA-BAA 11-14

3701 North Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203-1714

Technical

Question Response 22 On page 8 of the BAA please clarify the intent of the statement "Algorithms and architectures will be evaluated relative to government-provided optimized navigation solutions for a given set of sensor and IMU inputs for multiple scenarios". Is the government's intent to always have an IMU as part of the sensor set for phase 1 testing, and is thus purposeful in calling it out explicitly?

Some type of IMU will be present in the navigation solution. However, the one kind of IMU may be replaced by another.

23 What can we assume about the sensors and platforms?

Is a sensor/platform model available? Or do we have to supply a model for each as part of the framework?

Sensor and platform types are shown in Appendix 2. Appropriate statistical characterizations for specific platforms/sensors to be used for testing will be provided at least one month prior to testing along with an ICD.

24 Can you describe the DARPA ASPN testbed? Can we use our robots as test articles? (UAV, ground vehicles, surface and underwater vessels)? We have them available already.

The testbed will be created and hosted by an independent party on behalf of the government. You may propose your own platforms and vehicles for development and internal testing, but final testing will be conducted within the testbed.

25 How should we handle calibration of sensors, prior to mission, during mission (after mission)? To achieve high accuracy, we would have to calibrate the sensor on the platform it is attached to in the context in which it is to be used.

The testbed will provide calibration information, including for new sensors brought in to replace existing ones. Any data or formatting requirements specific to your proposed algorithms and/or architecture should be described in your proposal.

26 On a given platform do we know all the sensors that are available? How are they initialized, relative to the mission? Do you want us to handle sensors that come available at "random."

Performers will be given the specifics of the test sensors and IMUs 1 month prior to testing. However, specific combinations of sensors available at any given time will not be provided prior to testing.

27 Should we handle the transition from one type of platform to another in the course of a mission; e.g., person wearing a sensor with Bluetooth gets in a car, car sensors become available via Bluetooth. The platform changes. Also robot "lands" on boat, transferred, then takes off for mission continuation.

Yes.

28 Can we use sensors to "learn" the dynamics of the platform, e.g., neural net can learn robot platform

Yes; it is up to the performer how to use the sensor input.

model, within the context of a mission?

29 Should the architecture handle false alarms (detections) and spurious readings? Or are these part of the algorithms section?

Spurious readings should be dealt with as appropriate to the solution proposed.

For architecture (Topic 2) solutions, it is up to the proposer to define the level pf processing at a given location (e.g., at the sensor, at a central processor, etc.)

to address the program metrics.