A standalone desktop software application that simulates a virtual environment to test AI-based camera tracking algorithms for aligning mobile free space optical communication terminals.
Indian Space Research Organisation(ISRO) · Department of Space / Indian Space Research Organisation · Software
Signing in saves it for your whole team, so 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.
Virtual Environment Generator
Generates a configurable virtual environment with one or more moving targets.
Disturbance Simulator
Introduces disturbances like atmospheric turbulence, platform vibrations, noise, and camera motion into the feed.
Virtual Camera Controller
Implements a movable virtual camera that controls and repositions its viewport.
AI Tracking Engine
Automatically detects and continuously tracks the moving target beacon using computer vision.
Performance Dashboard
Displays tracking performance, statistics, and generates a performance report in real-time.
Both columns are read off the brief's own wording. Nothing here is inferred from the ministry's name.
The jury will check for a standalone executable application with complete source code, a technical report, and a user manual. They will verify that the software can generate a virtual environment, simulate disturbances, use AI for target detection and tracking, control a virtual camera, and automatically generate a performance log containing metrics like FPS, acquisition time, and tracking error.
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.
Specific numerical target values for tracking error or acquisition time?
The brief never answers this, so a panel will. Whatever you decide, say it the same way twice.
Exact parameters for atmospheric turbulence and platform vibration models?
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 virtual environment generator. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26169 itself: Generates a configurable virtual environment with one or more moving targets. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for disturbance simulator. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26169 itself: Introduces disturbances like atmospheric turbulence, platform vibrations, noise, and camera motion into the feed. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for virtual camera controller. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26169 itself: Implements a movable virtual camera that controls and repositions its viewport. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for ai tracking engine. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26169 itself: Automatically detects and continuously tracks the moving target beacon using computer vision. The brief asks for it by name.
The brief asks for performance dashboard. How would you build that?
Decoded from SIH26169 itself: Displays tracking performance, statistics, and generates a performance report in real-time. 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 for a standalone executable application with complete source code, a technical report, and a user manual.
This is the evaluator read for your problem statement, decoded from the brief's own wording.
Show me this working: they will verify that the software can generate a virtual environment, simulate disturbances, use AI for target detection and tracking, control a virtual camera, and automatically generate a performance log containing metrics like FPS, acquisition time, and tracking error.
This is the evaluator read for your problem statement, decoded from the brief's own wording.
Each one is quoted from a gap in the brief, not a guess about your team.
No measurable target
The text lists parameters like tracking error and acquisition time to include in the log, but specifies no minimum required success threshold for them.
No specific user named
The description names developers and participants, but never specifies the exact operational end user inside the organisation who will use the final software.
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.