The conclusion we came down to was that maze algorithms where the robots do not know the layout of the maze can only be solved with random direction selection (of course there can be variations but in terms of efficiency it is still random), besides creating varying maze layouts, there would not be enough variety of analysis to make maze algorithms worth researching. Thus we selected robot motion in empty and non-empty space. Which entailed a few possible scenarios

  1) Robot moving in free space heading towards obstacle without collision
  2) Robot moving in obstacle filled spacing heading towards destination with collision.
  3) 2 Robots moving in free space heading towards obstacles with inter-Robot collision
  4) 2 Robots moving in obstacle filled space heading towards obstacles with inter-Robot collision
  5) Etc.
The algorithmic solution to the collision, first entails detecting collision which neither of us have encountered. We attempted to discuss what collision is like between to humans.
  Example: as two humans approach different targets paths intersect how do they resolve this solution.
à Both People Move in Random Direction Away from Collision

à Dominant Person Goes First

à Two people can circle each other (like in a Waltz) until they are no longer intersecting paths

That is all the solutions we could come up with during this meeting.
We encountered some problems or rather questions that needed to be answered.
The first being:
  a. What assumptions are being made?
i. What do the robots already know?
   ii. How far can the robots see?
   iii. What degree of vision does the robot have? 360?
   iv. Can the robots communicate?
   v. Can the robots differentiate between other robots and obstacles? Is that needed?
   vi. Will each robot have the same programming?

We adjourned the meeting agreeing to spend more time thinking about the these questions as well as come up with other scenarios that would be interesting to watch unfold on an applet.