VMAC Test Cases: Historical Sources and Availability

This reference documents the surviving historical sources and XML sample pairs associated with the Virtual Manufacturing Automation Competition (VMAC) test cases (see domain background). The original 2011 test-case package has not been verified or republished here; the surviving 2010-context Pallet Viewer examples are documented separately below.

What the old link referred to

A May 2012 participant article links “test cases” to http://www.vma-competition.com/?q=node%2F13 and attributes them to the 2011 VMAC. This establishes the cited resource’s historical purpose. It does not recover the files behind that address or prove the contents of every version once served there.

For the competition’s broader context, see the VMAC historical overview. The NIST and IEEE sources help establish the subject and tasks, while the participant’s link supplies the more specific test-case reference.

File availability

The table below summarizes the surviving VMAC documentation and XML sample files verified in public archives as of October 6, 2026, distinguishing primary competition descriptions from repository example datasets.

Resource	Identified version or year	Availability and scope
NIST announcement	2010	Available context page; competition announcement scope
IEEE ICRA challenge description	2013	Available task description; conference track specification
Participant account	2012, referencing 2011	Available account and historical URL citation
Pallet Viewer ReadMe	Identifies ICRA VMAC 2010	Verified in repository; describes development-stage software
ex1.order.xml and ex1.packlist.xml	Examples in the 2010-context repository	Verified in repository; order and proposed placement data
ex2.order.xml and ex2.packlist.xml	Same repository context	Verified in repository; second example pair
Original package behind the 2011 test-case link	2011 as attributed by the participant	No verified release manifest or package checksum in public archives
Complete original rules and evaluator matching that package	Not established	Historical scoring rules and evaluator binaries remain unarchived

What the XML examples show

The inspected order files describe pallet constraints and ordered articles; the corresponding packing-list files describe planned package placements. This gives readers a concrete input/output pair to examine before studying the software. We do not infer a file’s measurement units from a bare number or assume that its constraints apply to another release.

Preserve each example order and packing-list filename together, but check their identifiers before use. In the inspected ex2.order.xml, PalletNumber is 2; ex2.packlist.xml uses 1. We have not executed the evaluator to determine how it treats that difference. The shared filename prefix therefore does not establish a validated pair. Record the repository commit as well as the filename: a branch name such as master can change. If you modify a sample, retain the original and label the changed copy. A result is difficult to interpret when an input and an output come from different revisions.

The repository includes a public-domain statement in Copyright.txt. That statement does not authenticate a 2011 release or establish rights for material hosted elsewhere. We link to these inspected examples instead of packaging unrelated historical files into a new “official” download.

Before using a recovered copy in research

Request a manifest naming each input, schema, rules document, and evaluator. Record the original download address, acquisition date, version identifiers, and file hashes. Identify modifications and the environment required to run the software. Then explain which score or behavior you reproduced and which aspects remain unchecked.

For comparisons, preserve the same input set and evaluator configuration. A feasible arrangement in a viewer does not establish physical carton strength, gripping reliability, or transport stability. The palletizing simulation guide separates those validation tasks.

Contribute a missing source

Send the current publisher the original URL, filenames, dated provenance, and permission information. A filename containing “2011” is a useful lead, but it is not sufficient evidence of an official complete release. We can update the table when the additional evidence supports a more precise status.