A software system that uses camera feeds to let an unmanned ground vehicle navigate safely outdoors without GPS.
Bharat Electronics Limited · Software
Signing in saves it for your whole team — everyone on your invite link sees the same two entries. Anything you shortlisted while signed out comes with you.
Decomposed from what the description asks for. Nothing added.
Perception AI
A lightweight model that identifies paths, rocks, ditches, and trees from camera feeds.
Visual SLAM Pipeline
A pipeline that tracks the vehicle position and orientation without using GPS.
Path Planner
An algorithm that translates visual data into movement commands to avoid obstacles.
Both columns are read off the brief's own wording. Nothing here is inferred from the ministry's name.
The jury will check if the software can successfully guide a vehicle from Point A to Point B without collisions in outdoor scenarios using only camera feeds.
A jury can still ask about these. Decide them deliberately rather than by accident.
Generated from the brief's own wording and the competition's published rules — never from a guess about what this ministry prefers.
What hardware or simulation environment will be used to test the software?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
What specific camera resolution or format is required?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
Has any part of this been shown at a previous event, hackathon or college project?
The guidelines are explicit: your solution must not have appeared in any previous event or programme, of any sort. A recycled project is what a team under time pressure reaches for.
The brief asks for perception ai. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26126 itself — A lightweight model that identifies paths, rocks, ditches, and trees from camera feeds. The brief asks for it by name.
What the organisers attached, and what the brief assumes you can get.
Same organisation, same year. Reading two of theirs tells you more about what they care about than reading one.
Pick what you are about to do and copy the prompt. It carries the organisers' own wording, the constraints they never spell out, and an instruction not to invent requirements they never set.
Who has this problem, what already exists, and what you would have to find out.
The brief asks for visual slam pipeline. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26126 itself — A pipeline that tracks the vehicle position and orientation without using GPS. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for path planner. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26126 itself — An algorithm that translates visual data into movement commands to avoid obstacles. The brief asks for it by name.
Where does your data come from — a published source, one you collect, or one you generate?
No dataset is attached to this problem statement, so sourcing it is part of the work and nobody told you that.
Why not use what already exists? Name the closest thing to this that is already running.
A team that has not named the alternative themselves is answering this for the first time in the room.
Which single thing will you demonstrate end to end, start to finish, with nothing skipped?
Ours, not a rule: a narrow thing that fully works survives questioning better than a broad thing that half works. If nobody on the team can name it, that is the finding.
Show me this working: the jury will check if the software can successfully guide a vehicle from Point A to Point B without collisions in outdoor scenarios using only camera feeds.
This is the evaluator read for your problem statement, decoded from the brief's own wording.