Nov 28, 2018
The course was challenging, but fulfilling. Thank you Coursera and University of Pennsylvania for giving this wonderful experience and opportunity that I might not experience in our local community!
Jul 03, 2018
The topic was very interesting, and the assignments weren't overly complicated. Overall, the lesson was fun and informative , despite the bugs in the learning tool(especially, the last assignment.)
by Glenn B•
Mar 08, 2016
The material is interesting, however there is not enough information provided by the course to effectively implement the algorithms in the allotted time of each week's assignments. It relies on deferring to external reading materials as primary sources, and these resources were not specified in advance to secure copies in a timely manner.
Additionally, there is a big disconnect between the knowledge provided by the weekly material and what is required to easily do the programming assignments in the suggested time of 3 hours.
Overall the course material needs to provide more background material to be more effective in delivering the knowledge expected each week. This may be an artifact of trying to cram what other online course provide in 7-10 weeks down into 4 weeks. If the intention is to give a "flavor" in 4 weeks, then the material needs to be distilled down into more of a cookbook format.
by Manoj R•
Jun 02, 2018
Very good overview of basic topics in Computational Motion Planning. The material is nicely and intuitively presented in short video lectures and is a rapid overview of the first 5-6 chapters in the book by Choset et. al.
Some of the assignments were too simple and required us to work on the non-critical parts of the problem. For example, only focusing on descending along gradients of artificial potential fields, instead of constructing them and seeing the effect of different types of potentials.
Also, a dominant portion of my time was spent fighting the autograder. There are tips on the forums to help deal with this but sometimes an almost-complete solution is presented by some of the earlier students in a frustrated attempt to get help with the autograder.
Many of these autograder related problems have not been addressed for many months.
by Ajinkya K•
Mar 06, 2016
Although the course covers interesting subject areas, I feel like the various topics should have been explored to a greater depth. I understand that someone with lesser background in the relevant areas might not agree with me. But overall, I felt slightly underwhelmed by the course.
Also, the skeleton of code provided for the assignments had minor errors and the instructions for assignments were sometimes ambiguous or even incorrect as compared to what was actually required of the code. But these minor issues will most likely get resolved in subsequent offerings of the course.
by Eduardo K d S•
Aug 03, 2016
The course is ok, it touches on some interesting topics and it serves its purpose as an introductory course. Unfortunately more interesting topics are only briefly mentioned at the end of the last video. I also think the assignments can be improved, some assignments lack documentation, one of them had a coordinate system swapped from what was shown on screen and the evaluation of some assignments are quite tight, even if you have it working, unless you deliver exactly as it is expected you will fail, not to mention what is expected is sometimes blurry.
by Benjamin K•
Dec 06, 2017
If the course had the same information and effort as week1 over all 4 weeks i would gave 5 stars, although the assignments are pretty good and I learnt something new, however the assignments are fun but the grader is annoying as the single error output is..... something is wrong... try again?!
by Keng-Hui W•
May 08, 2016
by Daniel W•
Jun 05, 2016
First course of this specialization was really GREAT, byt this course disappoints.
Of course, there are some interesting topics, but the form of the course is way lazier. Videos are short, there is small amount of additional materials,
by Emiliano J B O•
Feb 26, 2016
I think that the theory was very poor in sense of the videos were very short and with little content. The topics that we've seen were difficult to learn by itself, and a better explanation could be very useful in practice.
by Rafay A K•
Mar 14, 2016
The first two assignments certainly tested knowledge of the subject however the last two assignmnets were lacking. Good course that does what it is supposed to do. More feedback from test cases would be very helpful.
by Anton L•
Oct 30, 2017
Lectures are small, assignments are poor quality, you will probably solve matlab coding problems and try to adapt your working (at least your visual inspection says so) solution bad autograder without ANY FEEDBACK
by Julius S•
Jun 06, 2016
Great course! but there was too little content!!!! Double it !! Or double the coursework! make us do more work! Also, tell people to use 'parfor' to speed up the computations.
Otherwise, great course!
by Mike Z•
May 23, 2016
Very good introduction course for motion planning. Could be better if there is more interactions with the TAs. Also the matlab assignments have some minor mistakes which takes time to figure it out.
by Emeka E•
Mar 11, 2016
I think there is need to provide clearer instructions on how to get the programming assignments done. The course content is good, but doing the programming assignments needs to be more clarified.
by Alex M•
Mar 13, 2016
Most of the homework assignments aren't graded correctly out of the box and have errors. Also, only specific solutions are selected. Otherwise it's great material at a good pace.
by Lucas H C S•
Sep 23, 2017
Matlab online makes this course activities expensive in time, and some algorithms are not explained on the classe or texts, so you need to search a lot.
by Taimoor D K•
Aug 28, 2018
Course content is very good however topics should be covered in much detail. Frequent bugs in programming assignments is also a concern.
Jun 25, 2017
Too few details of the algorithms are provided. The assignment are too simplified to help students develop a good grasp of the contents.
by Luke J•
Sep 13, 2016
Not much content covered in course, especially compared to Aerial Robotics. No real great sense of achievement on completion.
by Unnat A•
Jul 01, 2019
The lectures should cover more in depth theory to better explain the concepts before giving such challenging assignments.
by Rayad K•
Mar 09, 2016
In comparison to the first course this one lacks a lot of organization and debugging before sending it to the public
by Marthinus J•
Apr 09, 2020
There was not enough examples or supplementary readings. Also the mentors and teachers dont reply on the forum.
by Sathvik D•
Sep 24, 2017
Covers the essentials pretty well. But, the programming assignments need a lot of improvement !!!
by Ajay G•
Nov 20, 2016
can be much better with little bit of more explanations and more relevant resources for help
by Chris A•
Apr 08, 2016
Very interesting material, but also very light instruction. Requires some MATlab intuition.
by Yixuan B•
Mar 21, 2016
The materials are not deep enough. And the programming assignments are just so-so.