|
|
|
I just read a fascinating article in December 1994 WIRED about MIT
Media Lab's "Cog" project, headed by Rodney Brooks.
"Cog is a vaguely humanoid robot with minimal programming which is
being "raised" in a manner similar to human infants. Necessary to this process
is constant input through several sense simulating sensors (vision, hearing
and touch) which I imagine go to a constant memory. The point is to see if
the robot goes through a human-like "learning" and development process by
which it learns to relate to the real world.
This approach is revolutionary in that it is real world based and not
dependent on a programmed simulation or map of the real world contained within
the robot's memory.
I am wondering about the specifics of this research, since it follows
an approach which I independently thought of and toyed with in my head starting
in about 1988. I have begun a correspondence with the author of the article,
and hope to continue it with Dr. Brooks or one of the project team. This
item is where I plan to share this information. Your comments and insights
are welcome, and since my background is not of a strongly technical nature,
I'm hoping that this forum will allow the more deeply technical concepts
involved in this project to be shared, through the translation of those here
with the appropriate background, with those of us interested laypeople.
Thanks!
83 responses total.
It's also an old science fiction plot. What I'd like to know is, do they cloth or disposable diapers?
Can you refer me to any science fiction stories in which this plot line was
pursued? I'd be interested in seeing how it was handled.
I'm curious about the nature of the memory setup in Cog, and what some
of it's basic "instinctive" programmed drives and responses are.
Eric, Get some Asimov. The I Robot series
I think that AI is interesting, and a good venture. But then again, what if they succeed? do YOU want to tell it that it is not human?
Yeh - like the pets we raise, it will probably consider itself human until told otherwise. Humorous implications abound - it might make a better sitcom than Mork did! Watch out Northern Exposure!
I'm sorry if I was not clear, but I entered this item specifically to discuss this line of research and its methods, and *not* its social implications. That would make for fascinating, but much trodden, discussion, and so I request that it please be taken to another item. Here, I would like to further my own understanding, and that of anyone else who is interested, in the mechanics and the processes of this particular project. Thanks, and I apologize again for the lack of clarity in intention.
I just got through reading a book called "Brainmakers" where they talk about just this sort of thing, and there's one section where it talks about how scientists seem to bo getting better results by going from the ground up, that is, by making insect like AIs first, and then building up to human level AIs.
WOW! I had no idea that robotics has actually come this far already. I expected to be dead by then.
I'm linking this to the cyberpunk conf. Join cyber at the Ok:.
I'm curious what the software/hardware of this robot is like. Can you tell us Eric? Are there any AI buzzwords I might recognize from my one undergraduate course in AI?
"learning" experiments with some of the neural network circuitry released in the last decade or so have been tried and documented in even such places as Scientific American. Check the readers guide to periodical lit. at the library. Also, electronic trade magazines such as Electronic Design have periodically covered release of integrated circuits containing modular neural circuits with some very interesting properties. They are easier to implement than the previous method of creating neural functions in software, which was a major undertaking in itself.
What I know of this actual line of research is limited to what I read in the
WIRED article, but I'm still waiting for some mail back from a couple of folks
I have written to find out more.
When I was thinking about this approach years ago, what I was hung up
on in the process was the nature of the memory involved. We were still too
far then from any reasonable simulation of human memory function
(read: parallel) for me to imagine that it was possible to pursue this
approach. Yes, there was the junction of separate processors in parallel
function, but the advent of fuzzy processors really is the key, I think.
There is still a tremendous amount about the memory hookups, and the
basic "instinctive" instruction that I'd still like to hear about.
If anyone reading this knows or can find out the e-mail address of
anybody on the research team, I'd love to open a dialogue with them and share
whatever they're willing to share of the information.
A good basic resource for bottom up A.I. info is Steven Ls book "Artificial Life." It's a good primer on complex adaptive systems, neural nets, insect like bots, etc. [err Stven Levy]
I agree w. #13. There is a lot of info available. Memory isn't memory as we're used to it in computers, but rather adaptive circuitry that simulates neurons' ability to define connections in response to stimuli. It's neat!
We do not have nural-net_parallel_hierartical hardware yet, don't expect to talk Kafka to a 'droid in the near future.
well... i am new to this but i have always had an interest in cyberpunk... but i never had the time or money to invest in it thru work and all maybe someone can help me????
Type "j cyberpunk" (without the quotes) at your nearest Ok: prompt.
Well, i sent off a note to Dr. Brooks, but have gotten no response. I guess a second try is in order.
second try is as follows: To: cdp@ai.mit.edu Re: Cog info please! Hi. I was quite pleasantly surprised to read about the nature of this project in the December issue of Wired magazine. In 1988, I took an introductory Cognitive Science course taught by Martin Ringle at Vassar. During that time, I gave much thought to the idea of taking a real world learning approach to "growing" an intelligent artifact. I was stumped by the methodology of constant memory input from several sensory devices, and the storage and integration of such input into a cohesive 'picture' of the reality within which the artifact exists. My model was the human infant, and the processes by which it learns to distinguish first light and dark, and then other physical distinctions such as self and other. If you would illuminate some issues for me, I would very much appreciate it. 1) What are some of the basic "instinct" commands which guide Cog? 2) Tell me a little about how Cog is powered, and whether one of its drives is the recharging of its power supply or whether that is a function unrelated to its development. (It makes for a good simulation of the human survival instinct!) 3) How is the memory storage done, and is it constant, as are the inputs? 4) Does Cog have a "cry?" I.e. a universal signal of need, to suffice until it can learn more sophisticated methods of communication. 5) If so, what are the circumstances which trigger the "cry?" 6) Has Cog shown any ability to connect "memories" of certain events with current experiences which repeat those memories? If so, tell me a bit about the process which allows this. I hope that these questions will help you with your documentation efforts as well as helping me understand the nature of the project's successes. If you wish to see the use to which I am putting this info for now, there is a conference item in the bbs at grex.cyberspace.org (telnet accessible) about your project. This is for no purpose other than to further my own understanding of the technology involved in making a reality of an idea I never thought would actually be pursued. Keep up the good work, and thank you! -Eric R. Bassey
(now linked to the accordion, so that the caltech robot groupies can particiapate!)
Ditto the recommendation to read S. Levy's "Artificial Life." Also, check out the relatively new "Journal of Artificial Life." A rigorous, huge, densely pack tome by Stuart Kaufman, "The Origins of Order" is also relavant. "Artifical life" is an unfortunate name for this field, in my judgment. It helps to take it seriously if you think in terms of "self-organizing software systems", but "artifical life" is the accepted keyword combination for literature searches.
i read about cog in an english science magazine; and i believe also in the cave there was discussion of the wahbot, do you remember that? i like moravec's writings lots and lots and i agree with shannon about the artificial life thing. please let me know when you are up to my rant on robotics and the humanities...
Participate? It was a dead item that we have now claimed! bwahahahahaha Thye project sounds fascinating, but i dunno whether it'll work. And the social implications, despite the originalposter's intentions, are the most important issue.
It will work, but slowly. There's time to accommodate, even co-evolve.
Yes but will it learn the fine art of the flame?
If you believe Nicholas Negroponte, it will. In _Digital Word_ he suggests that we look at technology from the computer's point of view, not the user's.
moravec says that there are two heridities cultural and biological and of the two biology is less important, and the cultural will go to the machines. this is interesting to me given competition and stuff like that. particularly in light of Utah.
Utah?
Hmmmm cyber Mormans, scary thought.
I wonder what the online equivalent of Special Underwear is.
Those big thick bandaids on your finger tips?
...handy, if you play bass while you cruise cyberspace... ...here is a "thought experiment"...suppose you have constructed/incubated a self-organising information processing system...does it make it more or less a candidate for "artificial life" status if this systemware is installed in a human brain?... ...does "artificial life" have to go clank...like "real minds" live in warm and furry houses?... ...I really want to know...
It it were installed in a human brain I'd tend to think of it as being more analogous to an artificial limb or organ. Unless it has independent thought. Although I can think of some organs that seem to exhibit independent thought...
Thanne! Shame on you!! Talking about organs in the accordion conference.
You're right. In penance I'll play 4 Lady Of Spains. Um, how does this thing work, anyway? <squeeeeeeeeekronk hooooooot bweeeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaap>
billy0, are you a fellow bassist? The reptile brain is a long-time accepted subject in here.
yes, I play bass...nothing like it to open up the lower chakras! ...maybe we can jam someday, if we end up in the same neighborhood... ...the 'thought experiment' I proposed is a higher cerebral thing, though... consider the following: ...it wants to be... ...it wants to be me... ...it wants to be you, too... ...it wants to organize us... ...it wants to *improve* us... ...it wants to heal us... ...these are its primary directives...they operate like drives, & shape global biases which emulate emotion... ...at some point, for (paradoxically) sanity's sake, it *must* be considered an independent, distinct entity... ...a prosthetic?... ...would *you* wear a wooden leg that told you where to go? ! ;-,
That depends on whether I thought it had good taste in locales.
Well, I had a sword that told me what to do once, and that was okay. Oh, wait. That wasn't me. I suppose it depends on whether I had to obey my leg or not. Also, I'd want to know who programmed it.
| Last 40 Responses and Response Form. |
|
|
|
- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss