Robotic Whiskers Sense Shape and Texture 59
An AC writes,"NewScientistTech has a story about robotic whiskers capable of sensing shape and texture in a similar way to those belonging to rats and seals. The 'bending moment,' or torque, exerted at the base of each whisker is used to extract feature information. The artificial whiskers could be used on interplanetary rovers, or allow underwater vehicles to track moving objects by their wake. Check out the slightly creepy video of them stroking a sculpted face."
Rats and Seals? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re:Rats and Seals? (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Actually, that wasn't my intention at all.
Re: (Score:1)
Anyway, it sounds like this technology will soon be used by the Navy.
Biomimetics (Score:3, Insightful)
Actually there's a whole field of "biomimetics" that recognizes that evolution has solved a lot of engineering problems already, giving us clues into things like ideal shapes for sails (birds' wings) and durable macro-scale materials (beehives). The trick to that field is in figuring out what aspects of nature to imitate; for instance, the Wright Brothers studied birds but didn't feel compelled to build a true "orni
Re: (Score:1)
Thus giving an altogether more literal definition to "Navy SEALs."
Re:Moo (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Re: (Score:1)
Beard?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Moo (Score:4, Interesting)
If God had taken out patents, people would be able to reference them, a good thing. We could probably cure cancer, and the whole Human Genome thing wouldn't have been necessary.
Also, they would have expired twenty years after they were granted, so they'd be public domain now anyway.
If only God actually HAD taken out patents...
Re: (Score:1)
Well, after they learned the language...
We could probably cure cancer, and the whole Human Genome thing wouldn't have been necessary.
More accurately, we'd be closer, if the goal is possible.
Also, they would have expired twenty years after they were granted, so they'd be public domain now anyway.
Which would destroy current patents...
Re: (Score:2)
Most scientists are not atheists.
Putting a dash for the "o" in "God" is a misinterpretation of Scripture.
Re: (Score:1)
Tell that to Slashdot.
Putting a dash for the "o" in "God" is a misinterpretation of Scripture.
Oh? Do you have any idea *why* i put the dash there, to then state that is a misinterpretation?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Out of respect. Not to just throw G-d's name (proper noun) around.
Basically, Jewish law (Yorah Deah, Hilchos Sefer Torah) forbids erasing G-d's name. So, many have accustomed themselves to not write G-d's name in Hebrew outright. This means leaving out a letter, or using the wrong letter (e.g. daleth instead of hay) or using a dash in between the letters, which is very common when the intent is not to write G-d's name, but use a name that include's one. This is
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
And i will point out that Rabbi Telushkin is wrong.
See "A Code of Jewish Ethics: Volume 1: You Shall Be Holy." I can't remember the exact passage, as it was from a library book.
No thanx. I don't really care enough to go get the book to see some passage that i know to be incorrect. However, if you feel so inclined, you may point it out to me, and i will show you the fallacy.
Although the reason you give is a different reas
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
So?
Either he has it correctly, or he doesn't. And i do not believe that he does. As i have mentioned the reason. And i can quote chapter and verse, Siman and S'if, for the relevant laws, and i know why people do it in Hebrew, and i know that it has carried over into English.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
I agree.
Plus they should have waited until that Chia-pet was fully developed before subjecting it to the rigors of a lab environment. I suspect that it will never be able to grow a uniform coat of sprouts now, thanks in large part to the creepy whiskers dragged across its face for (no doubt) hours at a time.
interesting point //Re:Um..Really lame video (Score:5, Informative)
I think what you are suggesting is that there should be simultaneous video of (1) the whiskers sweeping over the sculpted head, and (2) the computer drawing the image generated by the whiskers. Is that what you mean by "feedback?" If so, you're right, that would be a more convincing video. However, the system doesn't yet operate in real time. Real time operation wasn't our goal. Our goal was to illustrate the basic mechanical principle (bending moment alone gives you all the info you need, even in the presence of significant slip), and to demonstrate that this principle could work for both robots and rats (and seals, underwater)
The video posted here was intended to give an intuitive impression of the size of the whiskers compared to the head, the speed of the whiskers (currently slow, but that could be changed), the extent that the whiskers "slip" when they hit the head. The fact that the whiskers slip so much makes feature extraction really difficult, especially with no force sensors.
Thus, while I understand that you're dissapointed that we didn't have real-time image extraction, I take issue with the epithet "lame" as applied to our video.
Re: (Score:1)
I recommend taking down the "demo" as it serves no purpose except to make people question the project and the people behind it. Better to have a good paper and let the audience imagine how terrible the technology is than to give a demo that removes all doubt.
Not that it's terrible technology, of course. Just that you wouldn't
Re:interesting point //Re:Um..Really lame video (Score:5, Informative)
So when you say that the video has no purpose -- I think that is a result of the website not explaining the video correctly. The primary purpose of the video is to illustrate how hard the sensing problem is. How would you cope with the whiskers slipping and sliding all over the object, if you only had a sensor at the base of the whisker? It's a hard problem!
If the video is interpreted as a "demo," then it is a better demo if you look at the computer-generated image that the whiskers were able to extract. See the figure in the original article. The head on the left is the original sculpture. The image on the right is the sculpture as reconstructed by the whiskers.
You are absolutely correct that it's important to have a good paper when showing any scientific work. The peer-reviewed paper will appear in Nature tomorrow.
Re: (Score:1)
That came out wrong...
Re: (Score:2)
So you're suggesting I should read the article before drawing conclusions about your research? I can't imagine how that will help, but I guess I could give it a shot just this one time...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Question (Score:3, Interesting)
Thanks for posting - it is a really interesting concept and I'm glad you're doing the work (though if you need another test-dummy, count me out please). I hope you'll post another article once you've got a shiny real-time working model that maps onto a monitor - this is slashdot after all :-P
I have a question though. Is the length of the whiskers pre-defined in constructing the image? Mammal whiskers are always growing, falling out, getting clipped (burned, in my cat's case - "ooh, that candle looks s
Re: (Score:2)
The change in cross-section hadn't occurred to me - which just goes to show how long it's been since I did Civil Engineering! Biologically speaking I suspect the shape of whiskers is a combination of the fact that they're specially adapted hairs, and the importance of keeping whiskers light and flexible. My structural mechanics is rusty, but I think a rigid, fixed-cross-sect
they make a sound.... (Score:2)
They seem to be making a noise.. it sounds like "Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn"
Artificial Skin; Animal-Like Robots? (Score:5, Informative)
The skin research should be useful both for robotics and for replacement parts for humans, as an alternative to the clunky biological hand transplants that have been carried out. (I think I'd rather have a Luke Skywalker robot hand than a mismatched corpse's!) These artificial hand researchers [lucs.lu.se] will probably be interested as well, because having a prosthesis that can be sensed as well as controlled is necessary for it to be as good as the original. The big issue is how easy it will be to get these touch signals into the human nervous system in a useful way. For robots, the data can be built into existing software for making maps of a robot's surroundings. I picture a robot rat running a maze with a set of these whiskers. Won't whiskers serve as a low-energy-cost alternative to sonar and other sensing systems?
The odd thing is that here, the research is not into copying human abilities, but those of (nonhuman) animals. I wrote a silly article [anthrozine.com] arguing that future robots will be made to resemble animals, not humans, and Charles Van Doren (in A History of Knowledge) predicted "warm and fuzzy" robotics. Is that where we're headed?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1, Flamebait)
Robotic Whiskers? (Score:2, Funny)
Conspiracy (Score:3, Funny)
So QRIO and AIBO were discontinued, but almost every next day you can read about yet another freeky appendage or a robot designer to be inserted up your ass and crawl your intestines.
What are these guys preparing for us !?
Man, I'm so no taking the red pill.
Re:Conspiracy (Score:4, Funny)
ok.. that was a curious type of typo to make...
I for one... (Score:2, Funny)
This is old technology, I did this as a Senior HS (Score:2)
The wiskers could detect a ball, box, wrench, dog bone, and pencil. Basiclly the wiskers were conductive and protruded through
a conductive metal plate with circular holes for the "wiskers to poke through" Normaly the circuit was open.
When an object brushed against the sensors it will close the circuit and I would detect a pattern. I had many different patterns
stored for each object. T
Re:This is old technology, I did this as a Senior (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
object recognition, and a self learning applicaiton. This is much more than just detecting a profile.
Fast! (Score:1)