Animal Robots 114
hamlet2600 writes "The New York Time is running an article all about how animal like robots [Soul Sucking registration required] are beginning to become more imporant in furthering research. For years reseachers have been trying to make humanoid robots, Honda's ASIMO, MIT's M2 are some notable ones. It seems that more and more researchers are turning to the animal kingdom for "simpler" means of locomotion."
Missing option... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Missing option... (Score:4, Interesting)
The Most Amazing Humanoid Robot... (Score:1)
This thing looks like a small child and seems pretty inteligent.. My wife said she wan't to take one home and love it to bits (she's a bit broody at present), me.. I'd love to teach it to fetch my beer..
Re:Missing option... (Score:1)
There's a good book [plus.com] on it's development.
Missing feature (Score:1, Funny)
Re:Missing feature (Score:1, Funny)
Let's not forget (Score:1)
Let's not forget the AWESOM-O 4000
Re:Let's not forget (Score:1)
you deserve a better score than that, i choked on a mt. dew while reading that haha
LEGO Mindstorms are instructive too ... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:LEGO Mindstorms are instructive too ... (Score:1)
(This post sounds like one of our design meetings)
toys will be awesome (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:toys will be awesome (Score:2)
GMAIL invite:http://gmail.google.com/gmail/a-7f8259d7a6- 906ccc3c89-7d9bc96019 [google.com]
Always at Neuroscience (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Always at Neuroscience (Score:3, Funny)
So does Toys 'R Us.
and probably also (Score:2)
Re:Always at Neuroscience (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Always at Neuroscience (Score:1)
Interesting (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Interesting (Score:1)
DOH!
Why does it have to be snakes? (Score:3, Informative)
Karma whoring! (Score:3, Informative)
sensors and subprocessors. (Score:5, Insightful)
even animals have this "sensor" and the subprocessor systems to not tip over when a leg is lifted before the main processor can detect the change and ask for a balance correction.
too many projects are looking at monolithic processing, which can not handle a complex thing like walking and balance like an organism can.
Think about this, an animal like a dog or housecat is certianly not designed to use stairs, yet they adapt quite easily and quickly to handle them even though they were designed for human motion. A dog's rear leg has extremely limited motion compared to a human leg, yet they adapt to running up a stairwell quite easily, and some dogs can adapt to the point that they can climb a ladder!
MIT had a great program going about 15 years ago about seperating all robotic motion out to seperate processors and allow the main processor to issue interrupts to cause different motion, but I haven't heard from anyone in that program for a really long time. Anyone know if the program is still going?
Re:sensors and subprocessors. (Score:4, Informative)
Re:sensors and subprocessors. (Score:2)
Re:sensors and subprocessors. (Score:5, Informative)
an acelerometer can not detect rotation like the inner ear can nor can it reliably and with extreme precision detect acceleration in 3 axis.
your ear can detect acceleration in very VERY minute detail, along with anlge of tilt as well as rotation.
Granted prolonged rotation confuses the sensor.
I've messed with accelerometers, they are way too low resolution and limited. and the highest resolution and sensitivity units are so expensive that amost all robotics projects do not use them.
The inner ear is more than an accelerometer. plus, it's only one sensor in a group of sensors that animals and humans use for balance.
Re:sensors and subprocessors. (Score:2)
Re:sensors and subprocessors. (Score:2)
Make you legs straight and stiff, and walk on the balls of your feet. You can do reasonably well, and the only motors there are the ones in your thighs hmm plus the rest of your upper body for balancing.
Re:sensors and subprocessors. (Score:2)
Re:sensors and subprocessors. (Score:1)
Re:sensors and subprocessors. (Score:1)
gyro's do a very good job at measuring rotation. they are not that expensive either
you can get free (sample) and rather good mems accelerometers from A/D. gyros are about $60 for the ones i've used.
also can use magnetometers or full IMU for very nice closed-box intertial sensing. those cost quite a bit.
Re:sensors and subprocessors. (Score:3, Informative)
Wrong. Buy a small INS here. [xbow.com] There are standard units that contain three accelerometers and three rate gyros (one for each axis), which is what you need. They're getting smaller; 1 cubic inch units with all six sensors are available, and a single-chip version has been prototyped.
Most serious robotics projects today have one of these. They're not good enough for navigation by themselves, but they c
Organic power sources (Score:4, Funny)
Just think, the article's mention of that Disney robot dinosaur:
Animals don't like robots (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:Animals don't like robots (Score:1)
Re:Animals don't like robots (Score:2)
It really sucks, but to even remotely make an aibo 'real' to a dog, you'd have to give it fur, a distinctive smell, an arsehole (all a dog wants to do is sniff it, honest), and some wierd high-pithced ultra sonic sounds.........
until we learn how dogs communicate fully, we'll never get a dog to communicate with a robot properly...
Efficiency (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Efficiency (Score:1)
Lets rather make some.. (Score:2)
They're rather cute, and "fun".
Re:Lets rather make some.. (Score:2)
This will force us to collapse the Sun into a black hole, from which they will undoubtably escape and return to attempt to wreak havoc on our new planet until an Air Force colonel accquires the knowledge of an ancient intergalactic race (who have since ascended to a energy state of being), and uses it to create a weapon c
Oblig. Snowcrash ref.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Oblig. Snowcrash ref.. (Score:2)
This has been done for years (Score:1)
Teddy Ruxpin [mindspring.com] has for years been at the forefront of this field, dealing with human-talking-bear interaction.
its just a robot...geeez (Score:1)
What's this mean!?!?!? (Score:2)
A huge sector of the internet could be affected!
Mind over Matter (Score:3, Interesting)
If, on the other hand, you wish to use some of the lobster's physical and electromechanical techniques to create a robot that can respond to its environment independently of its controller, then you may have something worthwhile. The dramatic success of the Mars rovers, AFAIK, is due in large part to their adaptable mobility, the main impulse paths for which were copied from insects (ants?).
So, it seems to me that article misses the point -- it's not the physical structures of animals, but the neural processes that guide them, that researchers are so giddy about copying.
Peace, Love, and Soul.
I did not like transformers. (Score:1)
What about BUGS?!? (Score:1)
M2 (Score:5, Interesting)
The series elastic actuators are meant to simulate the interaction of a human muscle-tendon-bone system, and to allow for the design of a low-impedance system. M2 is designed to actually mimic the inherent low-impedence (low-stiffness) mechanical system that people represent. People are really awful at position based/high-impedance control, which is what most traditional robots use. This is useful for manufacturing, when you want the robot arm to always put the bolts in the same place, but leads to stereotypical "robot" movement (like the guy spastically jerking around on the dance floor). People are pretty good at force control though (there are all sorts of biological reasons for this). So M2 was built to be low-impedance like a person by using these S-A Actuators.
Virtual Model Control is supposed to allow more a more intuitive control of a robot by simulating it as a mechanical system. VMC lets you basically define springs and dampers at different points which are then simulated by the actuators. So to keep M2 standing, you might make a granny-walker out of springs, and to make it walk you could "attach" a spring to its chest pulling it forward. VMC has been implemented in simulation (where it works great), but it's not quite ready in real life.
The really cool thing about M2 is its potential. It already moves much more fluidly and naturally than any other robot out there, and its not nearly done yet. Once its working properly, it'll be able to walk essentially blindly (becuase its low impedance) like a person, rather than needing to know exactly where to place each foot (*cough*ASIMO*cough*) to keep from shattering itself.
If anyone has any other questions about how M2 actually works, I'd be happy to answer them.
-Zach
No Registration Link to article (Score:2, Informative)
Roll-Your-Own RoboDog, anyone? (Score:2)
FreeNYT (Score:1)
Orwell said it best! (Score:2)
Re:Orwell said it best! (Score:1)
ARL at McGill develops similar robots. (Score:2, Informative)
The Ambulatory Robotics Lab at McGill develops several robots, including a series based on cockroaches. They work really well... I'm biased, my girlfriend is doing her masters about one (aqua).
I think they have been slashdotted once already... They've got video of the robots online.
If interested, try: http://www.cim.mcgill.ca/~arlweb/Welcome.html [mcgill.ca]
IMHO, these are damned cool!
Re:ARL at McGill develops similar robots. (Score:1)
Oh, they are also partially funded by a group that includes Boston Dynamics (mentioned in the article).
But can Hesh be a TigerBot? (Score:2)
My favorite quaraped robot (Score:2)
He's always been my favorite (fictional) quaraped robot.
Re:My favorite quaraped robot (Score:2)
That's what I get for copy+pasting from the forum.
then... (Score:1)
The field has regressed in recent years (Score:3, Informative)
Raibert did some great work in the Leg Lab's early days. Raibert's big insight was that balance is more important than gait, and he did work with one-legged machines with springy actuators to force the issue. In his day, the Leg Lab had one, two, and four-legged running machines. But he left MIT to do a startup [bdi.com], which seems to have ended his dynamics work. BDI does mostly kinematic models.
The next professor to head the Leg Lab was Gill Pratt, who was more of an actuator guy. He didn't accomplish too much, and is now at some lesser school. Under Pratt, the Leg Lab backed down from running machines to walking machines.
There was somebody after Pratt, but apparently the Leg Lab is now defunct. It's sad. They made so much progress under Raibert.
It's possible to go beyond walking and running on the flat. Legs are really for traction control. All the MIT work assumes that the "feet" don't slip. That doesn't work on real hills or slippery surfaces.
There's two phases to dealing with slip. First, you need to limit joint torques to below where the feet start to slip. Once you do this, you can climb some hills. (Video, 8MB .mov file). [animats.com]
That work is ten years old, and still, nobody else seems to be handling leg slip at all.
The next step is to use the three joints of a leg [animats.com] to adjust the vector at which the normal force is applied to keep the ground contact inside the friction cone. Then you can climb more serious hills. Once you get this figured out, much of how humans move when dealing with terrain becomes clear. Leaning forward and bending the knees more when going uphill is all about slip control. Think about it.
Working on this diverted me off into physics engines, because everything that was available ten years ago sucked. So I did a physics engine that worked [animats.com], which turned into a business. There are still very few physics engines good enough for legged locomotion work. Most physics engines, especially the Baraff-type impulse/constraint ones, don't do friction well. Since legged locomotion is all about managing foot-ground friction, you need a simulator that gets friction right. (Hint: if a simulator can't do a driving game without special-casing the wheel/ground contact, it won't work for legged work.)
All this is patented [animats.com], of course.
Commencing 9 hour yipping session........*KICK* (Score:1)
Robo-Puppy mistreatment alert!!!
bug locomotion not easy either (Score:2)
Of course this is not a problem for a bug, because their exoskeletons are so strong for their weight and because they mostly have a big skid plate for an abdomen.
You have a half ton, three megabuck robot though, falling down becomes an issue.
Besides, as we knw from Discovery Channel, bugs switch from 6 to 4 legs when they want to
Re: (Score:1)
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:2)
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:3, Insightful)
1.Robots don't shit or piss all over your new carpet.
2.Robots don't chew your leather couch.
3.Robots don't hump your leg (well, maybe with some creative mods they might).
4.Robots don't need to be fed.
5.Robots don't need to go to the vet.
6.If you go on vacation, you can leave the robot wherever.
I would wager, however, that a robotic dog would be quite a bit less effective in attracting ladies.
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah, well you just described everything about a dog. Except you left out the companionship they provide. I agree, if you are too lazy to feed, walk, and clean up after the animal then don't get one get a robot. I just hope you never have kids, better buy robot children instead.
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:2)
Yes they do. Only instead of dog food it's electricity.
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:1)
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:2)
What about robot ladies??? Rowr!
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:2)
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:2)
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:2)
But, anyway, let us assume they are all true. Why would you like to have a pet robot? Because, it seems obvious if you just don't want to dress and care your pet cat or dog, you just don't need a pet cat, dog or robot.
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:3, Insightful)
If you dont feed a dog, he will die. If you do not recharge a robot, you have no active robot for a day.
You take a dog to the vet at times whether he needs it or not (heartworm and flea checks, etc). You'd take a robot to
Re:So they don't poop. (Score:2)
Who do you want to attract? (Score:3, Funny)
That's what I'm saying. Bring puppy to the park and you attract girls. Bring a robot and you attract nerds.
Re:Who do you want to attract? (Score:1)
Re:Who do you want to attract? (Score:2)
As long as a few of them are girl nerds, I'd personally still count that as a win...
Be nice. (Score:2)
Re:Be nice. (Score:2)
Re:Well (Score:2)
Would the question then become "Do android sheep dream of electricity?"