HOME  |  NEWS  |  BLOGS  |  MESSAGES  |  FEATURES  |  VIDEOS  |  WEBINARS  |  INDUSTRIES  |  FOCUS ON FUNDAMENTALS
  |  REGISTER  |  LOGIN  |  HELP
Blogs
Blog
Humans, Do You Speak !~+V•&T1F0()?
10/4/2012

Software that will let people and robots communicate to plan difficult and complex tasks, such as dismantling a nuclear power plant, is being developed at a Scottish university.   (Source: Wikimedia Commons/Stefan Kuhn)
Software that will let people and robots communicate to plan difficult and complex tasks, such as dismantling a nuclear power plant, is being developed at a Scottish university.
(Source: Wikimedia Commons/Stefan Kühn)

Return to Article

View Comments: Oldest First|Newest First|Threaded View
<<  <  Page 2/3  >  >>
Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: C-3PO
Ann R. Thryft   10/5/2012 11:55:51 AM
NO RATINGS
Lou, I get it--thanks for the C3PO reference. I can hear his voice in my head right now, and see him chasing after R2D2, sounding like a worried nanny.

William K.
User Rank
Platinum
Human-Robot communications
William K.   10/7/2012 8:00:11 PM
NO RATINGS
What it sounds like is that the robot will be deciding what it will do, or what it wants to do, and telling the human. That will take a whole lot more brains than robots presently have. The problem seems to be that the humans in the situation would not have enough understanding of the situation to make correct judgements. The condition of inadequate operator understanding and insight is tracable to not having an adequate operator, usually because of not respecting the skills needed for the task.

The concept of robots communicating to do some task is quite interesting, but here is a need for caution, since the understanding of separation between robots may also lead to robot self-awareness. So we need to be aware of what is being done in the field of autonomous robotics, to avoid creating the situations that have been the subject of science fiction  for many years. It does have the potential to be far worse than those stories ever predicted.

Mydesign
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Software for Nuclear power stations
Mydesign   10/8/2012 12:16:24 AM
NO RATINGS
1 saves
Teknochip, you mean to shut down all the operating systems and software before dismantling the entire system. In that case you can control only the machinery part, nothing to deal with the dangerous nuclear fission/fusion parts.

Mydesign
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Software for Nuclear power stations
Mydesign   10/8/2012 12:18:37 AM
NO RATINGS
1 saves
Naperlou, that's for the clarification. You mean a remote program to control the entire operations, which can help to avoid the usage of robots in case of disaster.

Mydesign
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Software for Nuclear power stations
Mydesign   10/8/2012 12:26:53 AM
NO RATINGS
1 saves
Ann, I have some other idea for disaster management, where humans can interact with robots via wifi or any other communication channel. This will help for a remote control operation from a master facility to control each and every wing of the nuclear station and safe shut down, in case of disaster.

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Human-Robot communications
Ann R. Thryft   10/8/2012 12:25:49 PM
NO RATINGS
Thanks, William, I think you captured the point of this research in your comments about autonomy. It is aimed at more autonomy in robots, which is why communication has to be much more detailed, and accurate, than it has to date. But inadequacy of the human operator is not the issue: inadequacy and incompleteness of information about why the robot makes the decisions it makes was one of the main spurs to this research. The two-way logic-to-text and text-to-logic communication will also let the human make informed suggestions and provide more data once it understands the situation as reported by the robot.

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Software for Nuclear power stations
Ann R. Thryft   10/8/2012 12:26:41 PM
NO RATINGS
Mydesign, wireless communication with remote-controlled robots is already used in military, nautical and rescue robots, among many other types, as we've mentioned before:
http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1386&doc_id=247687
http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1386&doc_id=242527
http://www.designnews.com/author.asp?section_id=1386&doc_id=246206
But that does not solve the communication problem. Most robots can only report back very limited types of data. And communication is one way in one direction and then one way in the other direction. It does not allow for full-duplex two-way conversations. Plus, the robots are not intelligent enough, or autonomous enough, to perform the delicate operations of decommissioning a nuclear power plant.

William K.
User Rank
Platinum
Human-Robot communications
William K.   10/8/2012 8:29:29 PM
NO RATINGS
Yes, Ann, the robots have only their sensor information to base decisions on, and that is often not enough to make the very best choice. That was part of the basis for my comments about the value of experienced humans in the loop. Robots lack insight and understanding, they can only make the decisions that they are programmed to make, which may well be safe, but probably not optimum. 

Giving the robots more data by allowing accurate communication will certainly offer the potential for better choices, and the concept of communicating that basis for the choices to a human is a good idea that should have been put into practice about 25 years ago.

Ann R. Thryft
User Rank
Blogger
Re: Human-Robot communications
Ann R. Thryft   10/9/2012 12:31:16 PM
NO RATINGS
William, thanks for clarifying. I agree, when I read the initial report, I thought why the heck hadn't somebody already figured this out and implemented it ages ago? OTOH, I don't think the state of hardware--sensors and processors--and comms tech were available for robots that could take advantage of this "translation" program.

ttemple
User Rank
Platinum
Re: Human-Robot communications
ttemple   10/11/2012 1:19:25 PM
NO RATINGS
This still doesn't make a lot of sense to me.

The robot is following some program that some human loaded into it.  The robot can only do what the programmer told it to do.

So, the human tells the robot what to do (via the program), and then the human says "why are you doing that?".  The answer is always the same - "because you told me to".

I would think the obvious solution to this supposed problem is to send all sensor data to a computer that is running the same decision making software as the robot, and watch what the program is doing. (It will be doing what you told it to do - which may or may not be what you thought you told it to do.)

This article somehow makes it sound like the robot has a mind of its own.  It doesn't.  It can only do what some human told it to do, so why ask it why?  The answer is, I'm doing what you told me to do given these sensor values.

<<  <  Page 2/3  >  >>
Partner Zone
More Blogs
It's been two years since the Mac Mini's last appearance on iFixit's teardown table, but a newly revised version joins Apple's lineup this week.
Science fiction author Isaac Asimov may have the best rules for effective brainstorming and creativity. His never-before-published essay, "On Creativity," recently made it to the Web pages of MIT Technology Review.
Much has been made over the potentially dangerous flammability of lithium-ion batteries after major companies like Boeing, Sony, and Tesla have grappled with well-publicized battery fires. Researchers at Stanford University may have come up with a solution to this problem with a smart sensor for lithium-ion batteries that provides a warning if the battery is about to overheat or catch fire.
In this new Design News feature, "How it Works," we’re starting off by examining the inner workings of the electronic cigarette. While e-cigarettes seemed like a gimmick just two or three years ago, they’re catching fire -- so to speak. Sales topped $1 billion last year and are set to hit $10 billion by 2017. Cigarette companies are fighting back by buying up e-cigarette manufacturers.
Advertised as the "Most Powerful Tablet Under $100," the Kindle Fire HD 6 was too tempting for the team at iFixit to pass up. Join us to find out if inexpensive means cheap, irreparable, or just down right economical. It's teardown time!
Design News Webinar Series
10/7/2014 8:00 a.m. California / 11:00 a.m. New York
9/25/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
9/10/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
7/23/2014 11:00 a.m. California / 2:00 p.m. New York
Quick Poll
The Continuing Education Center offers engineers an entirely new way to get the education they need to formulate next-generation solutions.
Oct 20 - 24, How to Design & Build an Embedded Web Server: An Embedded TCP/IP Tutorial
SEMESTERS: 1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6


Focus on Fundamentals consists of 45-minute on-line classes that cover a host of technologies. You learn without leaving the comfort of your desk. All classes are taught by subject-matter experts and all are archived. So if you can't attend live, attend at your convenience.
Next Class: 10/28-10/30 11:00 AM
Sponsored by Stratasys
Next Class: 10/28-10/30 2:00 PM
Sponsored by Gates Corporation
Next Class: 11/11-11/13 2:00 PM
Sponsored by Littelfuse
Learn More   |   Login   |   Archived Classes
Twitter Feed
Design News Twitter Feed
Like Us on Facebook

Sponsored Content

Technology Marketplace

Copyright © 2014 UBM Canon, A UBM company, All rights reserved. Privacy Policy | Terms of Service