Robonaut Designed to Work Safely With Humans, Exercise Limited Autonomy
…the robot uses an impedance controller, which can adjust the stiffness of the arms. This means the arms have limited torque and won’t cause damage to objects—or the crew.
“We went through very rigorous safety evaluations before we can send this robot to the space station,” Diftler told us. “So that you would feel very comfortable shaking hands with it.” In fact, we did shake hands with the robot—and we still have our fingers to type this story!
Diftler also told us about some of Robonaut’s jobs at the ISS. He said the robot is, among other things, assisting the crew with air flow measurements. Before they had the robot, the astronauts had to monitor air flow themselves. Now Robonaut just grabs an air flow meter and performs the measurements, not only collecting data more frequently than before but also freeing the crew from a boring task.
The idea is that Robonaut will increasingly take on other jobs, helping the crew with experiments and maintenance. For that, the Robonaut team designed the robot with varying levels of autonomy, Diftler said.
In autonomous mode, the robot can perform tasks that require little or no supervision. For tasks that require a crew member to monitor or assist the robot, a “supervised autonomy” mode is used. Finally, there are more complex situations when remote operation is the best option, and in those cases an operator (aboard the ISS or on Earth) can use teleoperation gear to fully control the robot.
(via Video: How Robonaut’s Compliant Arms Work - IEEE Spectrum)
Humanoid Robots Mimic Insect Swarm Behavior to Improve Task Synchronization
Biologists have long puzzled over the ability of bacteria and social insects to sense not only the presence of compatriots but their number and to synchronise their behaviour.
It turns out that these creatures perform this synchronisation using a process called quorum sensing. This works by constantly releasing signalling molecules into the environment while at the same time measuring the local concentration of these molecules. This concentration rises as more creatures join the local population and so is an effective measure of population density. When the concentration rises over some threshold level, it triggers a different behaviour such cell division, pathogen production and nest building.
Now Bechon and Slotine say a similar approach provides a robust way to synchronise humanoid robots. The ideal approach to synchronisation is for each robot to have access to every other robot’s position. Instead, the quorum sensing approach gives, each robot access to a global variable such as the average position or average clock time. Each robot can also change this variable because it contributes to the average.
The idea is that if each robot attempts to synchronise with this global average, the swarm as whole should keep good time.
(via Humanoid Robot Swarm Synchronised Using Quorum Sensing - Technology Review)
DARPA Seems to Favor Humanoids in Robotics Challenge:
The robots themselves don’t need to take a human form, but many of the tasks DARPA’s challenge addresses favor robots in humanoid form. The challenge lays out a number of jobs the robot needs to address that would be helpful in the aftermath of a natural or industrial disaster, such as the one that rocked the Fukushima nuclear power plant.
Contestants in the challenge will need to build robots that can operate a vehicle, including steering, braking, entering, and exiting.
The same robot needs to be able to travel across varied terrain and navigate obstacles such as rubble. In other scenarios, the robot will remove debris from a doorway, enter a building, and break down a wall or concrete panel with power tools. The challenge also calls for the ability to walk on an industrial walkway and ladder and then locate and fix a broken pump.
The premise assumes robots operating in an environment optimized for humans and human labor. As robots become more common, and future infrastructure upgrades assume human-robot co-operation the need for humanoids may decline.
(via DARPA: Build us robots that drive — and use power tools | Cutting Edge - CNET News)
Follow-Up: US Navy firefighting robot pictured for the first time
Navigating the confines of a damaged U.S. Navy ship to extinguish fires while at sea sounds like the ultimate torture test for a humanoid robot, and that metal man above — called SAFFiR — is designed to take on the task. We first heard about SAFFiR when we visited Virginia Tech’s RoMeLa laboratory, which is working on the project in conjunction with the University of Pennsylvania with $2.6 million in funding from the U.S. Navy Research Laboratory. Since then we’ve heard a few more details about the robot, but this is the first time we’ve actually seen the firefighting ‘bot pictured. It looks all-legs to us at this point — arms are going to come into play at a later point to help it climb up ladders — but you can clearly see the aluminum core that’s designed to help SAFFiR conquer the heavy load of the firefighting equipment and fire-retardant suit it’ll have to carry.
(via singularitarian)
![Russian Media Moghul Promises Brain-Upload Technology in 30 Years:
At the recent Global Future 2045 International Congress held in Moscow, 31-year-old media mogul Dmitry Itskov told attendees how he plans to [create] a robot controlled by the human brain, then [transplant] a human brain into a humanoid robot, and then [replace] the surgical transplant with a method for simply uploading a person’s consciousness into a surrogate ‘bot.
He thinks he can get beyond the first phase—to transplanting a working brain into a robot—in just ten years, putting him on course to achieve his ultimate goal—human consciousness completely disembodied and placed within a holographic host—within 30 years time.
Pushing aside all the extremely difficult technological challenges for a moment, there are a couple of important to considerations tied up in Itskov’s vision.
First, while the later phases of his project are so far out as to seem ridiculous, phase one is totally feasible (in fact it’s already being done). From there, the leap to phase two—human brainpower transplanted into a mechanical robot—is a quite a leap. But if we are willing to allow that it might be possible even within the next 30 years, then we have to consider a further possibility: that many people alive today—like the twenty-something author of this piece—could be confronted with this kind of technology in their lifetimes.
(via Will People Alive Today Have the Opportunity to Upload Their Consciousness to a New Robotic Body? | Popular Science)](http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m0f0qmgyL21qgpcs1o1_500.jpg)
Russian Media Moghul Promises Brain-Upload Technology in 30 Years:
At the recent Global Future 2045 International Congress held in Moscow, 31-year-old media mogul Dmitry Itskov told attendees how he plans to [create] a robot controlled by the human brain, then [transplant] a human brain into a humanoid robot, and then [replace] the surgical transplant with a method for simply uploading a person’s consciousness into a surrogate ‘bot.
He thinks he can get beyond the first phase—to transplanting a working brain into a robot—in just ten years, putting him on course to achieve his ultimate goal—human consciousness completely disembodied and placed within a holographic host—within 30 years time.
Pushing aside all the extremely difficult technological challenges for a moment, there are a couple of important to considerations tied up in Itskov’s vision.
First, while the later phases of his project are so far out as to seem ridiculous, phase one is totally feasible (in fact it’s already being done). From there, the leap to phase two—human brainpower transplanted into a mechanical robot—is a quite a leap. But if we are willing to allow that it might be possible even within the next 30 years, then we have to consider a further possibility: that many people alive today—like the twenty-something author of this piece—could be confronted with this kind of technology in their lifetimes.
Kids Want Robot Teachers, Says Lego-Funded Study:
The survey was built around asking 350 “kid-innovators” aged eight to 12 how things would change if robots were part of their everyday lives. The results indicate that children have a very human view of robots.
Instead of machines that get tasks done for them, these digital natives see robots as ideal humans, able to help them at various tasks and make them feel comfortable socially.
“Robots are better versions of our teachers and parents, offering limitless time and patience, encouraging confidence and self-direction, and allowing us to make mistakes sans self-consciousness,” according to the study.
In addition, the study’s authors argue that robots can help remove any social stigma related learning at school. Perhaps the most common type of robot used today for education is Lego’s Mindstorm which teaches children how to program the device’s sensors and motion. The pictures students in the study drew were commonly of humanoid robots that act as companions to children’s daily lives, alternating between play companion and homework helper.
(via Reading, writing, arithmetic, and…robots? | Cutting Edge - CNET News)
iRobot CEO Colin Angle vs. Humanoid Robots:
It’s no surprise that uber-geek and iRobot CEO Colin Angle is a Star Wars fan. But even though the heroic R2-D2 and humanoid C-3PO get all the glory, Angle admires the lowly MSE-6, a small, box-shaped droid that scurried around the floor to make repairs and lead the thousands of storm troopers around the Death Star.
Why? “We could build that robot!” says Angle. Instead of idolizing R2-D2 and C-3PO, the world would be in much better shape if the robotics industry focused on solving real problems, even if they’re mundane, ugly, or dangerous…
“When we first launched Roomba, we didn’t even call it a robot—it was the media that called a robot. If you ask the typical two- or three-year-old or a teenager what a robot is, they will think about a humanoid that does my homework for me or walks the dog.
When I go and talk to kids and pull out the Roomba, it’s not this big “wow!” moment. Yet 85 percent of Roomba owners name the Roomba. People get so attached to these devices because they make their lives easier so that you get this deep emotional commitment. There are so many opportunities to make a bad decision in building a robot company on top of all the normal ways that entrepreneurs screw up that it is incredibly difficult to truly create value because it is so cost-sensitive.
We have a robot in our office called Scooby Doo (used for spotting roadside bombs in Iraq) and when it was finally blown up, the operator carried it back with tears like it was a fallen comrade. Why? Because if it weren’t for that robot, he’d be dead. Once again, it’s sex appeal versus importance.”
(via iRobot CEO: Enough with the gimmick ‘bots (Q & A) | Cutting Edge - CNET News)
