Joe Sharkey Structural Option Christiana Hospital 2010 Project Newark, DE.
Adaptive Robotics COM2110 Autumn Semester 2008 Lecturer: Amanda Sharkey
description
Transcript of Adaptive Robotics COM2110 Autumn Semester 2008 Lecturer: Amanda Sharkey
11
Adaptive RoboticsAdaptive RoboticsCOM2110COM2110
Autumn Semester 2008 Autumn Semester 2008 Lecturer: Amanda SharkeyLecturer: Amanda Sharkey
22
Robots in the newsRobots in the news
Bath University: a robot that jumps like a Bath University: a robot that jumps like a grasshopper and rolls like a ballgrasshopper and rolls like a ball
Created by PhD student Rhodri ArmourCreated by PhD student Rhodri Armour Can roll in any direction, and can jump Can roll in any direction, and can jump
over obstaclesover obstacles Small motors build up energy in the Small motors build up energy in the
springy spherical exoskeleton by springy spherical exoskeleton by compressing it.compressing it.
Avoids problems of robots with legs and Avoids problems of robots with legs and robots with wheelsrobots with wheels
33
Behaviour-based robotics versus Behaviour-based robotics versus GOFAIGOFAI
Control mechanisms: Control mechanisms: Subsumption architectureSubsumption architectureArtificial Neural Nets (ANNs) Artificial Neural Nets (ANNs)
learning rules and learning rules and limitationslimitationsGenetic algorithmsGenetic algorithms
Biological inspirationBiological inspirationForms of learning in biological Forms of learning in biological organismsorganismsOrganisation of biological systemsOrganisation of biological systemsBiological modellingBiological modelling
ExamplesExamplesEarly robots, Humanoid robots, Early robots, Humanoid robots, Examples of research papers, Examples of research papers, ApplicationsApplications
Last week – AI, Magic and DeceptionLast week – AI, Magic and Deception
44
a) Provide a brief account of the following terms, a) Provide a brief account of the following terms, and their relevance to behaviour-based robotics:and their relevance to behaviour-based robotics:
(I) embodiment (10%)(I) embodiment (10%) (ii) reactivity (10%)(ii) reactivity (10%) (iii) stigmergy (10%)(iii) stigmergy (10%)
b) Consider, with reference to the notion of b) Consider, with reference to the notion of autopoiesis, whether or not strong embodiment is autopoiesis, whether or not strong embodiment is possible. (30%)possible. (30%)
c) Identify and discuss what you see as the main c) Identify and discuss what you see as the main
strengths and weaknesses of the new approach strengths and weaknesses of the new approach to Artificial Intelligence. (40%)to Artificial Intelligence. (40%)
55
Classical AI (GOFAI)Classical AI (GOFAI) E.g. chess player, expert systems or E.g. chess player, expert systems or
traditional planning systems like traditional planning systems like STRIPS, or GPS (General Problem STRIPS, or GPS (General Problem Solver) Solver)
Emphasis on manipulation of Emphasis on manipulation of symbols, planning and reasoningsymbols, planning and reasoning
Centralised systemsCentralised systems SequentialSequential
66
CognitivismCognitivism
Cognition is the manipulation of abstract Cognition is the manipulation of abstract representations by explicit formal rulesrepresentations by explicit formal rules
Knowledge of the world as sentence like Knowledge of the world as sentence like descriptions using symbolsdescriptions using symbols
Symbol – stands for objects and Symbol – stands for objects and conceptsconcepts
E.g. CYC project for creating common-E.g. CYC project for creating common-sense reasonersense reasoner
77
Problems with Classical Problems with Classical systemssystems
Lack of robustnessLack of robustness May not perform well in noisy conditions, or May not perform well in noisy conditions, or
when some components break downwhen some components break down Lack of generalisationLack of generalisation
May not perform well in novel situationsMay not perform well in novel situations Real time processingReal time processing
Likely to be slowerLikely to be slower centralisedcentralised
88
Further problems with Further problems with Classical AIClassical AI
Little consideration of interaction Little consideration of interaction between agent and the real worldbetween agent and the real world
Frame problemFrame problem How to model changeHow to model change
Symbol groundingSymbol grounding How to link the symbols being How to link the symbols being
manipulated with the real worldmanipulated with the real world
99
Frame problemFrame problem
Daniel Dennett (1987)Daniel Dennett (1987) Robot with propositional representationsRobot with propositional representations E.g. INSIDE(R1,ROOM) E.g. INSIDE(R1,ROOM)
ON(BATTERY,WAGON) ON(BATTERY,WAGON) Spare battery in room with time bombSpare battery in room with time bomb R1 plans to pull wagon and battery out of R1 plans to pull wagon and battery out of
room. But bomb also on wagonroom. But bomb also on wagon R1D1 considering implications of actions. R1D1 considering implications of actions.
But still deciding whether removing wagon But still deciding whether removing wagon would change the colour of the walls when would change the colour of the walls when bomb explodesbomb explodes
1010
Back to the drawing board. “We must teach it the Back to the drawing board. “We must teach it the difference between relevant implications and difference between relevant implications and irrelevant implications. So they developed a irrelevant implications. So they developed a method of tagging implications as either relevant method of tagging implications as either relevant or irrelevant to the project at hand and installed or irrelevant to the project at hand and installed the method in R2D1. They found it sitting outside the method in R2D1. They found it sitting outside the room.the room.
““Do something” they yelled. “I am” it retorted. “ Do something” they yelled. “I am” it retorted. “ I’m busily ignoring some thousands of I’m busily ignoring some thousands of implications I have determined to be irrelevant. implications I have determined to be irrelevant. Just as soon as I find an irrelevant implication, I Just as soon as I find an irrelevant implication, I put it on the list of those I must ignore and”put it on the list of those I must ignore and”
The bomb went offThe bomb went off
1111
Symbol grounding problem Symbol grounding problem and the Chinese Roomand the Chinese Room
Gedanken (thought) experimentGedanken (thought) experiment Imagine a person in a room, who has a set of rule books. Imagine a person in a room, who has a set of rule books.
Sets of symbols are passed in to them, and they can Sets of symbols are passed in to them, and they can process them, using the rule books, and send symbols outprocess them, using the rule books, and send symbols out
The symbols going in are Chinese questionsThe symbols going in are Chinese questions The symbols going out are Chinese answersThe symbols going out are Chinese answers The room seems to understand ChineseThe room seems to understand Chinese But the person in the room does not understand ChineseBut the person in the room does not understand Chinese Similarly, a question answering computer program does not Similarly, a question answering computer program does not
understand languageunderstand language Computers don’t understand – they just manipulate Computers don’t understand – they just manipulate
symbols that are meaningless to them.symbols that are meaningless to them.
1212
Related papersRelated papers Harnad, S. (1990) The symbol Harnad, S. (1990) The symbol
grounding problem. Physica D. 42, grounding problem. Physica D. 42, 335-46.335-46.
Searle, J.S. (1980) Minds, Brains and Searle, J.S. (1980) Minds, Brains and Programs. Behavioural and Brain Programs. Behavioural and Brain Sciences, 3, 417-24.Sciences, 3, 417-24.
1313
Behaviour-based AIBehaviour-based AI AKA – embodied cognitive science, new AI, AKA – embodied cognitive science, new AI,
new wave AInew wave AI Brooks, 1986 subsumption architectureBrooks, 1986 subsumption architecture
Emphasis on intelligence emerging from the Emphasis on intelligence emerging from the interaction of organism with the environment, interaction of organism with the environment, and close coupling between sensors and and close coupling between sensors and motorsmotors
Brooks, 1990 “Intelligence without Brooks, 1990 “Intelligence without Representation” and Behaviour-based Representation” and Behaviour-based RoboticsRobotics
1414
Key concepts in Embodied Cognitive Key concepts in Embodied Cognitive ScienceScience
EmbodimentEmbodiment SituatednessSituatedness
Emphasis on interaction with the environmentEmphasis on interaction with the environment Biological inspirationBiological inspiration
StigmergyStigmergy EmergenceEmergence Reactive behaviourReactive behaviour DecentralisationDecentralisation
1515
Reactive roboticsReactive robotics Grey Walter’s electronic tortoisesGrey Walter’s electronic tortoises Taxis and tropismTaxis and tropism
Phototropism, PhototaxisPhototropism, Phototaxis PhonotaxisPhonotaxis Coastal seaslugCoastal seaslug
Geotaxis, negative and postive phototaxisGeotaxis, negative and postive phototaxis
1616
BiologyBiology Biological modellingBiological modelling
Cricket phonotaxisCricket phonotaxis Catagylphis desert antCatagylphis desert ant Task allocationTask allocation Understanding by building: synthetic modellingUnderstanding by building: synthetic modelling
Biological inspirationBiological inspiration Sorting (Holland and Melhuish)Sorting (Holland and Melhuish)
StigmergyStigmergy EmergenceEmergence Minimal representationMinimal representation
1717
Biological inspirationBiological inspiration Swarm robotics and swarm intelligenceSwarm robotics and swarm intelligence Keep it simple: Minimal representation and Keep it simple: Minimal representation and
reactive systemsreactive systems Innate knowledgeInnate knowledge
Fixed action patternsFixed action patterns Learning and evolutionLearning and evolution
Classical conditioningClassical conditioning Operant conditioningOperant conditioning Neural netsNeural nets Genetic AlgorithmsGenetic Algorithms
1818
MechanismsMechanisms Subsumption architecture Subsumption architecture Braitenberg vehiclesBraitenberg vehicles McCulloch and Pitts neuronsMcCulloch and Pitts neurons
Main characteristicsMain characteristics Neural Nets and learning algorithmsNeural Nets and learning algorithms
Strengths and limitationsStrengths and limitations Hebbian learning Hebbian learning Delta ruleDelta rule Generalised delta ruleGeneralised delta rule
Genetic AlgorithmsGenetic Algorithms Evolving neural nets Evolving neural nets
1919
Strengths and Limitations of Strengths and Limitations of reactive systemsreactive systems
A reactive system is one “A reactive system is one “where sensors and where sensors and motors are directly linked and which always motors are directly linked and which always react to the same sensory state with the same react to the same sensory state with the same motor action”motor action” (Nolfi and Floreano, 2000) (Nolfi and Floreano, 2000)
E.g. Grey Walter’s electronic tortoisesE.g. Grey Walter’s electronic tortoises
E.g: a reactive robot with Braitenberg E.g: a reactive robot with Braitenberg controller - simple neural network e.g. fully controller - simple neural network e.g. fully connected perceptrons without internal layers connected perceptrons without internal layers or any form of internal organisation.or any form of internal organisation.
2020
Did Brooks et al reject the idea of internal Did Brooks et al reject the idea of internal representation?representation?
2121
CriticismsCriticisms
Criticisms of approach Criticisms of approach
see Anderson (2003)see Anderson (2003)
No complex intelligent creature can get by without No complex intelligent creature can get by without representations….Kirsh (1991)representations….Kirsh (1991)
2222
CriticismsCriticisms Ford et al (1994): concerned that “The Ford et al (1994): concerned that “The
situationalists are attacking the very idea of situationalists are attacking the very idea of knowledge representation – the notion that knowledge representation – the notion that cognitive agents think about their environments, cognitive agents think about their environments, in large part, by manipulating internal in large part, by manipulating internal
representations of the worlds they inhabitrepresentations of the worlds they inhabit””
2323
CriticismsCriticisms Vera and Simon (1993) argue that Vera and Simon (1993) argue that
proponents of situated action are not proponents of situated action are not saying something different to proponents saying something different to proponents of physical symbol systemsof physical symbol systems Situated action proponents claimSituated action proponents claim (according (according
to Vera and Simon)to Vera and Simon) No internal representationsNo internal representations Direct access to affordances of the environmentDirect access to affordances of the environment No use of symbolsNo use of symbols
2424
CriticismsCriticisms But Vera and Simon point out that minimal But Vera and Simon point out that minimal
representations are usedrepresentations are used E.g. Pengi, and the notion of “the bee that E.g. Pengi, and the notion of “the bee that
is chasing me now” is still a symbol.is chasing me now” is still a symbol. ““If the SA approach is suggesting simply that If the SA approach is suggesting simply that
there is more to understanding behaviour than there is more to understanding behaviour than describing internally generated, symbolic, goal-describing internally generated, symbolic, goal-directed planning, then the symbolic approach directed planning, then the symbolic approach has never disagreed.”(Vera and Simon, 1993has never disagreed.”(Vera and Simon, 1993))
2525
Pengi explanationPengi explanation Agre and Chapman (1987) Agre and Chapman (1987) Pengi is a simulated agent that plays Pengi is a simulated agent that plays
the video game Pengothe video game Pengo Plays without planning or using Plays without planning or using
representationsrepresentations E.g. escaping from “the bee that is E.g. escaping from “the bee that is
chasing me now”, down “the corridor chasing me now”, down “the corridor I’m running down”I’m running down”
2626
Also, limitations to reactive Also, limitations to reactive systemssystems
Embodied and situated systems can Embodied and situated systems can sometimes solve quite complicated tasks sometimes solve quite complicated tasks without internal representations.without internal representations.
E.g. E.g. sensory-motor coordinationsensory-motor coordination (exploiting (exploiting agent-environment interaction) can solve agent-environment interaction) can solve tasks, as agent can select favourable tasks, as agent can select favourable sensory patterns through motor actions.sensory patterns through motor actions.
But there are limits.But there are limits.
2727
Examples of problems that can be solved Examples of problems that can be solved through through sensory-motor coordinationsensory-motor coordination
Perceptual aliasingPerceptual aliasing Sensory ambiguitySensory ambiguity
Clearly simple behaviours such as obstacle Clearly simple behaviours such as obstacle avoidance can be accomplished without avoidance can be accomplished without internal represenationinternal represenation
2828
Perceptual aliasingPerceptual aliasing: two or more objects : two or more objects generate the same sensory pattern, but generate the same sensory pattern, but require different responses.require different responses.
E.g. Khepera robot in environment with 2 E.g. Khepera robot in environment with 2 objectsobjects one with a black top to be avoided, one with a black top to be avoided, One with white top to be approachedOne with white top to be approached
Khepera: 8 infrared proximity sensors and a Khepera: 8 infrared proximity sensors and a linear camera with a view angle of 30 degrees.linear camera with a view angle of 30 degrees.
2929
3030
If robot approaches object which is not in view If robot approaches object which is not in view angle of camera, it will receive an ambiguous angle of camera, it will receive an ambiguous sensory pattern.sensory pattern.
Solution – to turn towards object, so it is in view Solution – to turn towards object, so it is in view angle of camera, and sensory pattern angle of camera, and sensory pattern disambiguated.disambiguated.
An example of An example of active perceptionactive perception.. Similar behaviour found in fruit fly Drosophila, Similar behaviour found in fruit fly Drosophila,
which moves to shift perceived image to certain which moves to shift perceived image to certain location of visual field.location of visual field.
But limits to this strategy – will only be effective when robot But limits to this strategy – will only be effective when robot can find at least one sensory state not affected by aliasing can find at least one sensory state not affected by aliasing problemproblem..
3131
Example of Example of active restructuringactive restructuring: Scheier et al 1998.: Scheier et al 1998. Khepera should approach large and avoid small Khepera should approach large and avoid small
cylindrical objects in a walled area.cylindrical objects in a walled area. Robot receives information from 6 frontal proximity Robot receives information from 6 frontal proximity
sensors.sensors. Neural network trained to discriminate between Neural network trained to discriminate between
patterns corresponding between cylindrical objects patterns corresponding between cylindrical objects and walls, or between different sizes of cylindrical and walls, or between different sizes of cylindrical object.object.
Poor performance on large/small cylindrical objectsPoor performance on large/small cylindrical objects
3232
3333
3434
Problem is that sensory patterns belonging Problem is that sensory patterns belonging to different categories overlap.to different categories overlap.
““put differently, the distance in sensor space for data put differently, the distance in sensor space for data originating from one and the same object can be large, originating from one and the same object can be large, while the distance between two objects from different while the distance between two objects from different categories can be small” (Scheier et al 1998)categories can be small” (Scheier et al 1998)
But Scheier et al (1998) used artificial But Scheier et al (1998) used artificial evolution to select the weights for robot’s evolution to select the weights for robot’s neural controllers.neural controllers.
3535
Near optimal performance after 40 generations.Near optimal performance after 40 generations. Fittest individuals moved in the environment until Fittest individuals moved in the environment until
they perceived an object (large or small).they perceived an object (large or small). Then they circled the objectThen they circled the object Circling behaviour resulted in different sensory Circling behaviour resulted in different sensory
patterns for different sizes of object.patterns for different sizes of object. i.e sensory-motor coordination allowed robots to i.e sensory-motor coordination allowed robots to
obtain sensory patterns that could be easily obtain sensory patterns that could be easily discriminateddiscriminated..
3636
So, some difficult tasks can be solved by So, some difficult tasks can be solved by exploiting environmental constraints exploiting environmental constraints through sensory-motor coordination and through sensory-motor coordination and active perception.active perception.
But, not allBut, not all An alternative to simple reactive An alternative to simple reactive
behaviour – robots that can exploit behaviour – robots that can exploit internal dynamical status.internal dynamical status. By using neural network with recurrent By using neural network with recurrent
connectionsconnections
3737
Summary to dateSummary to date Classical AI vs Behaviour-based AIClassical AI vs Behaviour-based AI What is reactive behaviour?What is reactive behaviour? What can it accomplish? What can it accomplish?
Simple tasks, e.g. obstacle avoidanceSimple tasks, e.g. obstacle avoidance Some harder tasks by exploiting the Some harder tasks by exploiting the
environment and active perceptionenvironment and active perception Limits – example of tasks that require some Limits – example of tasks that require some
internal states.internal states.
3838
Tasks that require reasoningTasks that require reasoning::- activities that involve predicting the behaviour of - activities that involve predicting the behaviour of
other agentsother agents - activities which require responses to action in the - activities which require responses to action in the
future e.g. avoiding future dangersfuture e.g. avoiding future dangers- activities that require understanding from an activities that require understanding from an
objective perspective e.g. following advice, or a objective perspective e.g. following advice, or a new receipe.new receipe.
- Problem solving e.g how many sheets of paper Problem solving e.g how many sheets of paper needed to wrap a packageneeded to wrap a package
- Creative activities e.g. language use, musical Creative activities e.g. language use, musical performance.performance.
3939
Mataric (2001) identifies “behaviour-based Mataric (2001) identifies “behaviour-based systems as an alternative to reactive systems as an alternative to reactive systems.systems.
She identifies strengths and weaknesses She identifies strengths and weaknesses of reactive systems.of reactive systems. Strengths: real-time responsiveness, Strengths: real-time responsiveness,
scalability, robustnessscalability, robustness Weaknesses: lack of state, inability to look into Weaknesses: lack of state, inability to look into
past or future.past or future.
4040
Mataric (2001) characterisation of Mataric (2001) characterisation of types of controltypes of control Reactive control: don’t think, reactReactive control: don’t think, react Deliberative control: think hard, then Deliberative control: think hard, then
act.act. Hybrid control: think and act Hybrid control: think and act
independently in parallelindependently in parallel Behaviour-based control: think the way Behaviour-based control: think the way
you act.you act.
4141
Behaviour-based controlBehaviour-based control Behaviours added incrementally – Behaviours added incrementally –
simplest first.simplest first. Behavioural modules can use internal Behavioural modules can use internal
representations when necessaryrepresentations when necessary But no centralised knowledge But no centralised knowledge
4242
Related idea Related idea Action oriented representationsAction oriented representations (Clark, 1997(Clark, 1997))
Use of minimal representations – e.g. when looking Use of minimal representations – e.g. when looking for coffee cup, you search for yellow object.for coffee cup, you search for yellow object.
..
partial models of the world which include only those partial models of the world which include only those aspects that are necessary to allow agents to aspects that are necessary to allow agents to achieve their goals. (Brooks 1991).achieve their goals. (Brooks 1991).
4343
But if the same body of information were But if the same body of information were needed in several activities, might be more needed in several activities, might be more economical to deploy a more action-neutral economical to deploy a more action-neutral encoding.encoding.
E.g. if knowledge about an object’s location to E.g. if knowledge about an object’s location to be used for many different purposes, might be be used for many different purposes, might be better to generate a single action-independent better to generate a single action-independent inner map that could be accessed by multiple inner map that could be accessed by multiple routines.routines.
4444
Reactive issueReactive issue Change from traditional AI: different emphasis Change from traditional AI: different emphasis
on importance of mental representations.on importance of mental representations.
Embodied and situated approach: minimal Embodied and situated approach: minimal internal representations best viewed as partial internal representations best viewed as partial models of the world which include only those models of the world which include only those aspects that are necessary to allow agents to aspects that are necessary to allow agents to achieve their goals (Brooks, 1991)achieve their goals (Brooks, 1991)
4545
Embodiment – robots deal with real Embodiment – robots deal with real objects in the real world, not symbolsobjects in the real world, not symbols
Does that mean they can really be Does that mean they can really be said to be intelligent and capable of said to be intelligent and capable of thought?thought?
Discuss …..Discuss …..
4646
EmbodimentEmbodiment Key concept in embodied and Key concept in embodied and
situated AIsituated AI Idea that robots are physically embodied Idea that robots are physically embodied
and can act on the worldand can act on the world
Does the use of embodied robots make Does the use of embodied robots make Strong AI possible?Strong AI possible?
4747
Weak AI:Weak AI: computer is valuable tool for study of computer is valuable tool for study of mind – ie can formulate and test hypotheses mind – ie can formulate and test hypotheses rigorouslyrigorously
Strong AI:Strong AI: appropriately programmed computer appropriately programmed computer really is a mind, can be said to understand, has really is a mind, can be said to understand, has cognitive states.cognitive states.
Strong AI:Strong AI: “the implemented program, by itself, is “the implemented program, by itself, is constitutive of having a mind. The implemented constitutive of having a mind. The implemented program, by itself, guarantees mental life” Searle program, by itself, guarantees mental life” Searle (1997)(1997)
4848
Problems: how can symbols have Problems: how can symbols have meaning? (Searle and Chinese room)meaning? (Searle and Chinese room)
4949
Two possible solutionsTwo possible solutions Symbol grounding (not covered here) Symbol grounding (not covered here) Situated and embodied cognitionSituated and embodied cognition
5050
Situated and Embodied Situated and Embodied cognitioncognition
Exemplified by Rodney BrooksExemplified by Rodney Brooks Approach emphasises construction of Approach emphasises construction of
physical robots embedded in and physical robots embedded in and interacting with the environmentinteracting with the environment No central controllerNo central controller Subsumption architectureSubsumption architecture No symbols to groundNo symbols to ground Intelligence is found in interaction of robot with Intelligence is found in interaction of robot with
its environment.its environment.
5151
Is strong embodiment possible?Is strong embodiment possible? Sharkey and Ziemke (1998) – only Sharkey and Ziemke (1998) – only
weak embodimentweak embodiment Robots are allopoietic, not Robots are allopoietic, not
autopoietic machines.autopoietic machines.
5252
AutopoiesisAutopoiesis Etymologically (means) self-makingEtymologically (means) self-making Abstract description of self organising Abstract description of self organising
systems.systems. Maturana and Varela (1972) Autopoiesis Maturana and Varela (1972) Autopoiesis
and Cognition: the realisation of the living.and Cognition: the realisation of the living. An autopoietic system is defined in terms An autopoietic system is defined in terms
of its organisation:of its organisation:
5353
““a network of processes of production a network of processes of production (transformation and destruction) of components (transformation and destruction) of components that produces the components which (i) through that produces the components which (i) through their interactions and transformation continuously their interactions and transformation continuously regenerate the network of processes (relations) regenerate the network of processes (relations) that produced them: and (ii) constitute it (the that produced them: and (ii) constitute it (the machine) as a concrete entity in the space in machine) as a concrete entity in the space in which they (the components) exist by specifying which they (the components) exist by specifying the topological domain of its realization as such a the topological domain of its realization as such a network. (Maturana and Varela, 1980).network. (Maturana and Varela, 1980).
5454
For life, embodiment is required.For life, embodiment is required.““Autopoiesis in the physical space [is] a Autopoiesis in the physical space [is] a
necessary and sufficient condition for a necessary and sufficient condition for a system to be a living one.” (Maturana system to be a living one.” (Maturana and Varela, 1980)and Varela, 1980)
5555
Living organisms – organised as a unitary Living organisms – organised as a unitary wholewhole
Basic phenomenon: self organisation of a Basic phenomenon: self organisation of a single cell.single cell.
Core of autopoiesis: the self-production of the Core of autopoiesis: the self-production of the organism’s boundary as a unitary systemorganism’s boundary as a unitary system
““a living system is an autopoietic machine whose a living system is an autopoietic machine whose function it is to create and maintain the unity that function it is to create and maintain the unity that distinguishes it from the medium in which it exists” distinguishes it from the medium in which it exists” (Sharkey and Ziemke(Sharkey and Ziemke, 2000), 2000)
5656
.. Maturana and Varela: Maturana and Varela: Machines made by humans are Machines made by humans are
allopoieticallopoietic. . The components are The components are produced by other processes that are produced by other processes that are independent of the organisation of the independent of the organisation of the machine.machine.
Robots – no multicellular solidarity (or Robots – no multicellular solidarity (or living cells) . Sensors, controllers and living cells) . Sensors, controllers and actuators are not integrated into body.actuators are not integrated into body.
5757
Cell: first living system which determines Cell: first living system which determines its own boundaries (cell membrane)its own boundaries (cell membrane)
Emphasis on self-constructed, self-Emphasis on self-constructed, self-maintaining bodily boundary.maintaining bodily boundary.
An autopoietic machine such as a living An autopoietic machine such as a living system is a special type of homeostatic system is a special type of homeostatic machine for which the fundamental machine for which the fundamental variable to be maintained is its own variable to be maintained is its own organisation.organisation.
5858
Imagine colony of self-maintaining robotsImagine colony of self-maintaining robots Assembler robots to build robots out of partsAssembler robots to build robots out of parts Transplant robots able to replace damaged partsTransplant robots able to replace damaged parts Tinker robots able to manage some types of damageTinker robots able to manage some types of damage Some artificial evolution, improving their design.Some artificial evolution, improving their design.
But still engineering – the constituents of the But still engineering – the constituents of the system will not have been autonomously system will not have been autonomously generated, but manufacturedgenerated, but manufactured..
5959
Is strong embodiment possible?Is strong embodiment possible?
A robot is not a living system, and not A robot is not a living system, and not autopoietic, so it does not autopoietic, so it does not experience experience the the world – there is no “self” there to do the world – there is no “self” there to do the experiencing.experiencing.
its ‘experience’ is no different from that of its ‘experience’ is no different from that of an electronic tape measurean electronic tape measure
(No phenomenal embodiment)(No phenomenal embodiment)
6060
Also there is an important difference Also there is an important difference between animals and robots. between animals and robots.
Animals have coevolved with their Animals have coevolved with their environmentsenvironments
In a robot, the intimate relationship In a robot, the intimate relationship between the body of a living organism and between the body of a living organism and its environment is missing.its environment is missing.
(no mechanistic embodiment)(no mechanistic embodiment)
6161
Weak embodiment is possible.Weak embodiment is possible. Possible to model mechanistic theories of Possible to model mechanistic theories of
animal behaviouranimal behaviour Possible to use robots to study how artificial Possible to use robots to study how artificial
agents can enact their own environmental agents can enact their own environmental embedding.embedding.
I.e. can study an allopoietic machine as if it I.e. can study an allopoietic machine as if it were autopoietic, and this can yield scientific were autopoietic, and this can yield scientific insights.insights.
6262
SummarySummary Classical AI vs Embodied Cognitive ScienceClassical AI vs Embodied Cognitive Science
Newer approach emphasises connection to the Newer approach emphasises connection to the environment and embodimentenvironment and embodiment
What is a reactive robot?What is a reactive robot? Limitations of reactive systemsLimitations of reactive systems Minimal representations and interaction with Minimal representations and interaction with
environmentenvironment Can a robot really be embodied?Can a robot really be embodied?
Does embodiment solve problems of Strong AI?Does embodiment solve problems of Strong AI? Not living, and not autopoieticNot living, and not autopoietic Has not evolved together with environmentHas not evolved together with environment
6363
Where will adaptive robotics go next?Where will adaptive robotics go next? Beyond stigmergy – local communicationBeyond stigmergy – local communication Epigenetic systems – development of Epigenetic systems – development of
knowledge and representation as a result of knowledge and representation as a result of interaction with the worldinteraction with the world
Language evolutionLanguage evolution Social robotics – capitalising on our Social robotics – capitalising on our
anthropomorphism.anthropomorphism.