Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Robotics Science

Robots Do The Darndest Things 145

Posted by timothy from the and-then-they-take-over dept.
alito writes "15 years ago they couldn't get them to walk, now they are rollerskating (video). Read more about the 2004 Intelligent Robotics and Systems conference in this New Scientist article, and at the conference's site. Also shown at IROS, a childbirth simulator for obstetricians, a capsule that crawls through your intestines, and a 3-mm long swimming robot. (No, I don't get paid by New Scientist.)"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Robots Do The Darndest Things More

Robots Do The Darndest Things

Comments Filter:

  • Duping yourself now timothy? (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 10, 2004 @03:49PM (#10487468)
    Do you even read the stories you post [slashdot.org]?
    • He must, seeing as how this isn't a dupe story. When Slashdot refers to old related stories in new ones, are those dupes?

    • SOSDD (Score:4, Funny)

      by Mulletproof ( 513805 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @07:45PM (#10488790) Homepage Journal
      Are you kidding? The process is as automated as possible. The reader submits story and a script assigns a 1d20 probability in that story being selected (based on the karma and subscription status of the submitter, of course). If it manages to pass that AC rating check, the script assigns the story an editor name at random and publishes it to the front page. Of course, stories occationaly roll and natural 20, wence they are kicked to a live editor for approval. Obviously this isn't a common occurance as you can tell.

  • I'd really like to see... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Ismenio ( 629516 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @03:50PM (#10487473) Homepage Journal
    Bill Cosby interviewing some of those 'bots' :)

  • As long as they don't get them confused... (Score:5, Funny)

    by datastalker ( 775227 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @03:52PM (#10487485) Homepage
    ...we should be okay...

    Doctor: Okay, put the robot in.

    Patient: Doc, this feels a little funny...

    Doctor: Nurse, which robot did you use?

    Nurse: Oh dear god, I think I used the roller skating one!

    Patient: AAaagggh...

    Doctor: D'oh, there goes another one!

    Nurse: Well, I'm off to check on the obstetrical robot!

    Doctor: Make sure that one's not wearing rollerskates!

  • what's the point? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by wintermute1000 ( 731750 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @03:53PM (#10487495)
    You know, not only did I not think that robot was great at roller-skating, I just can't think of any real use for a roller-skating robot even if it were a real ace at the sport. Meanwhile, my house could use cleaning, and there aren't any robots to do it for me (well, Roomba et al, but I'm talking real cleaning). I think there needs to be a reevaluation of priorities in the robot design field. Who needs another goddamned dancing/skating/stairclimbing robot?

    • Re:what's the point? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by horrens ( 785051 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @03:58PM (#10487519)
      actually it's a pracitce in balance
      if you ever have tried rollerskating then you should know that it requires quite good balance and body control

    • Re:what's the point? (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Well, maybe you could pack it with explosives and get it into somewhere crowded, then, when all the $NATIONALITY infidels are going "oh, how cute, a roller skating robot" and crowding around it... BLAM!.

    • Re:what's the point? (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      This looks a bit pointless to me too. I mean all well & good making robots for miniscule applications, like the rollerskating one, or a birth trainer, but what about making ones that can help ALL people?. I don't know about anyone else but putting this much effort into applications for a subgroup of the population smacks of waste.

      How about improving the existing robots we have now, and moving on from there?
      • all well & good making robots for miniscule applications, like the rollerskating one, or a birth trainer, but what about making ones that can help ALL people?

        Last time I checked a very large proportion of the population was born in some way.

      • Re:what's the point? (Score:1, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward
        but what about making ones that can help ALL people?

        I disagree. We don't want robots to go the way of cellphones, where they can make calls, take photos, play mp3s, etc, all in a mediocre way. I'd prefer to have an army of small robot each specializing in a handful of tasks. This way, each robot can be built well by a specialist in the area, and when the shopping robots breaks I can still use the cleaning robot, or upgrade the sex robot without upgrading my singing robot...
    • Getting motors and motor controllers with a high enough power density and acceleration (power) to move like that is pretty impressive. If you've never tried building a motion control system, the difficulty may not be apparent. There are multiple layers (or nested loops) of control at work here, and to get this fluidity of "organic motion" implies that in addition to the position, velocity, and acceleration control, they probably also have some rather sophisticated kinematic/inverse kinematic processing goi
      • You know i agree that it wasnt that great of a skater tho.

        It seemed to avoid the balance situation by picking its feet up very slowly to keep the wheels of the down foot in static friction. The only time it rolled anywhere was rolling it onto the table.
    • Coming soon to "The Late Show with David Letterman": Stupid Robot Tricks.

      Matt

    • I always view the goal of robotics development as the advance of intelligent mechantronics device... The cool things mentioned are cool mechantronics device (Honda humanoid robot, the tiny swimming bot etc). They are remotely controlled, make possible because of the improvements in control theory (humanoid robot) and MEMS (tiny bots).

      In terms of the intelligence, there aren't much improvements...

    • Re:what's the point? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by rebelcool ( 247749 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @07:32PM (#10488714)
      The point is to demonstrate advancements in balanced mobility. Its very difficult to get a robot to walk well with anything resembling 'legs'. Roller skates introduce lots of unpredictable uncertainty into walking, and to have a control system fast enough to detect and adapt to the changes is very impressive.

      As most things in our world are built around our type of mobility (legs), an autonomous real world robot will interact with us and our world far better if it emulates our system of mobility.

      Thats the point.
    • Hmrph.. that robot is no more rollerskating than a guy wearing a snowboard trying to jump his way across flat terrain is boarding. Not to say that this is not a feat - I am indeed impressed that the little fella' kan keep his balance, and very gracefully too, but he's a long way from going any faster than he could without wheels!
    • Meanwhile, my house could use cleaning, and there aren't any robots to do it for me.

      Maybe roller-skating is much easier than cleaning a real home with all its niches and obstacles, after all. You'd have to teach the robot that the carpet has to be hoovered, and the windows need to be cleaned with a sponge, water and a few drops of dish washing liquid in it and not the other way round. You need to tell it not to pour any water over your brand new 21" TFT, and you'd have to hardwire the use of stonger det

      • You'd have to teach the robot that the carpet has to be hoovered, and the windows need to be cleaned with a sponge, water and a few drops of dish washing liquid in it and not the other way round. You need to tell it not to pour any water over your brand new 21" TFT, and you'd have to hardwire the use of stonger detergents for cleaning the toilet.

        I don't think this is very hard. You just have to give the robot a list of things together with the apropriate detergent. The more difficult part about cleaning
        • You just have to give the robot a list of things together with the apropriate detergent.

          Okay. But if location of things is not fixed (chairs) or can contain objects (tables, desks), then you need to recognize objects before matching "things" against your detergent list. Pattern recognition is hard.

    • You know, not only did I not think that robot was great at roller-skating, I just can't think of any real use for a roller-skating robot even if it were a real ace at the sport. Meanwhile, my house could use cleaning, and there aren't any robots to do it for me (well, Roomba et al, but I'm talking real cleaning). I think there needs to be a reevaluation of priorities in the robot design field. Who needs another goddamned dancing/skating/stairclimbing robot?

      Why does everything new have to be immediately 10

  • IROS 2004 website (Score:4, Informative)

    by News for nerds ( 448130 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @03:55PM (#10487504) Homepage
    is here [iros2004.org].

  • Rollerbot Mirror (Score:5, Informative)

    by hardlined ( 785357 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @03:56PM (#10487510) Homepage
    Here is a mirror for the Rollerbot Video:

    http://shell.athenet.net/~files/rollerbot.wmv

    It'll probably get slashdotted too, but to sources are better than one right?
  • ...they'd likely fire you for directly linking to a 3mb movie file from the front page of Slashdot. I hope their bandwidth fees aren't too bad this month, we'll see how long it holds out before it's totally Slashdotted...

  • Rollerskating robots.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 10, 2004 @03:58PM (#10487524)
    I think you may be missing the point. Rollerskating, running, walking, what have you, are important fundamental tasks that must be worked out before you will *have* a robot that can do something advanced like wash your dishes or walk you dog. If it can't rollerskate with perfection how do you expect a robot to perfrom a mundane task competently. I for one welcome rollerskating robots.

  • Let's not foget about... (Score:1, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Danny Bot

    http://www.dannybot.com/

  • Robot isn't autonomous, its remotley controlled (Score:5, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 10, 2004 @04:01PM (#10487540)
    The robots is a small version of the Honda robot, both are not autonomous as they are controlled by a human operator. Just like UAV with a human on ground guiding it with a joystick.

    These Japanese are playing stricks with the media saying they have advanced robots when in fact they are nothing more than radio controlled "toys"!

    • Actually Asimo (the honda robot) can self adjust its footsteps while being controlled. Or it can be preprogrammed for a specific task, not needing any control.

      http://science.howstuffworks.com/asimo6.htm [howstuffworks.com]

    • Re:Robot isn't autonomous, its remotley controlled (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @05:00PM (#10487817) Homepage Journal
      The robots(sic) is a small version of the Honda robot

      No, that robot is the Sony robot. A completely different beast.
      Japan is funding research into humanoid robot devellopment, and so all the big companies are develloping their own.

      Honda was the first to get a humanoid walking robot. By now its smaller, runs on batteries and they even programmed it to recognise faces and a few words of japanese. You can instruct it verbally to follow you around, its quite an achievement.

      Sony has their doll sized robots who can dance and run around and allmost skate (its not really skating), and it can mimic the movement of a surfer on a mechanised surf board. It impressed me by its ability to keep its balanced when lightly shoved, and to get back up if it falls down.

      Toyota has a trumpet playing robot, who was on wheels at first, but they pretty much had to give it legs after the other two did it. And in doing so also made a sort of robot-legged chair, the demo video of which is worth seeing for the look of great fear in its test pilot's eyes, despite his helmet and four point harness.

      As far as commercial applications, Honda rents its robot to companies and museums for its coolness factor, and has plans to sell it as a household appliance for the elderly. Its the size of a child and I think they aim to have it able to perform the simple tasks an old person might give a child to do as chores. Pick stuff up, help them out of bed and whatnot.
      Sony are apparently going for the high-tech doll market, a follow-up to its robot dog product line.
      Toyota...I dunno, superhuman robot orchestra? They seem to be a "mee too" effort.
    • Actually, a human-controlled but self-balancing walking robot is almost as huge an advance for the field of robotics as an autonomous one. That said, I haven't been hugely impressed by Sony's demos so far. This one was interesting at the beginning as the robot balanced on the ramp and through the turn, but when rollerskating on its own power, it was basically just walking on rollerskates. Its walking demos haven't been too impressive either; it always keeps its center of gravity above the foot that's on
    • its not so much of a far leap from radio controlled walking/driving/rollerskating to transfering that control to a computer to do that same thing. You definately have to have the basics down first.
    • http://www.androidworld.com/prod01.htm

  • Hey.... (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    That robot is using the same roller blades my little sister does!

    • Re:Hey.... (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Is your sister by chance named VICKI?

  • 3mm long swimming robots? (Score:4, Funny)

    by moosesocks ( 264553 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @04:12PM (#10487602) Homepage
    Who thought of The Matrix immediately after reading the blurb about "3mm swimming robots"

    scary.....
    • I thinking robotic sperm delivery. Hell I could set off a bomb and give these things a tiny exoskeleton to crawl around the neighborhood spreading my seed or whatever else I cooked up.

      Is all eugenics bad?

  • Getting small (Score:3, Funny)

    by Concerned Onlooker ( 473481 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @04:15PM (#10487616) Homepage Journal
    From the article:
    "Effectively we would like to enable the doctor to become very small," he says.
    I think Steve Martin [jt.org] has already beaten them to the punch.

  • Mirror (Score:5, Informative)

    by paul248 ( 536459 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @04:16PM (#10487617) Homepage
    Here's a mirror [purdue.edu] of the video. Not sure how fast it'll be.

  • EEG controlled robots (Score:4, Interesting)

    by gihan_ripper ( 785510 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @04:23PM (#10487644) Homepage

    From TFA:

    Millan is developing robotics that can be controlled using EEG signals from the brain. He hopes eventually to enable disabled and paralyzed people to control robotic wheelchairs or prosthetics in this way.

    Looks like Professor Xavier may follow shortly!

    But seriously, this does seem to be a real potential benefit for all humans. We will effectively be able to extend our own bodies using robotic technology, perhaps controlling figher aircraft and other complex machinery with our minds.

    • We will effectively be able to extend our own bodies using robotic technology, perhaps controlling figher aircraft and other complex machinery with our minds.

      It may amaze you, but current day fighter aircraft and other complex machines are controlled by people's minds. They use an interface called "the human body".

    • We will effectively be able to extend our own bodies using robotic technology...

      Note that Worf tried this once [startrek.com]. There was an accident and became paralysed. One mildly sucessful treatment involved relays transmitting signals to his muscles from the brain through electronic devices.

  • We're headed for trouble (Score:4, Insightful)

    by beware of the robot ( 814413 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @04:27PM (#10487663)
    In my opinion, it is not a question of *when* we'll get trouble from the robots we're going to create, but what we're going to do about it.

    We might as well start planning right now. The article in the posting, as well as numerous other reports, show that the robot mechanics is getting better and better. What is lacking, is some real AI. I think that within 30-50 years, if not before, this "problem" will also be solved.

    That's when trouble starts. As Isaac Asimov shows in his literary "experiments" with the three laws of robotics, even *with* benign top priority imperatives NOT TO HARM humans, we may not be safe.

    Given the mechanics and the AI, how will robots become a threat to us? Imagine a scientist in a robot laboratory sometime in the future. He/she has all the parts needed to produce the ultimate robot: agile and completely autonomous. I think the temptation will be too much for *any* person. It will be impossible to refrain from releasing a completely free and autonomous robot into society to see what happens. Imagine the excitement: This is comparable to a second creation; it is almost like being God.

    Naturally, the robot will have a strong need for self preservation. So it will start to secure land, natural resources, labour, spare parts, factories, and so on, and build other robots and societies to fulfill these and other purposes.

    This is when conflicts will start. Wars often start as a result of a disagreement over natural resources or land.

    Ideas, anyone?
    • And remember robots eat the medication old people need to live. So act now and get robot insurance.
    • Look, we have Bruce in one freezer for when that football field size meteor comes strait for earth one day, we can just put Smith in the next chamber for when the inevitable day comes and the robots rebel causing bloody murder! Or should I say, MDKs...murder death kill. :)
    • robotics, even *with* benign top priority imperatives NOT TO HARM humans

      The army doesn't call them robots, they call them "unmanned vehicles", but they are heading towards autonomy, and they are carrying "payloads".

      Killer robots aren't a possibility, they are a reality (and besidses, industrial robots have accidently killed humans already).

      Naturally, the robot will have a strong need for self preservation.

      Naturally.
      But the robot is not a creation of nature, and so might very well not be endowed with
    • Ideas, anyone?

      plenty [singinst.org]. And I agree with you, but while Asimov wrote some great stories, the "three laws" are a useful plot device at best. Development of real, human friendly AI will have to take into account resource contention etc. just as you point out. The most important thing is that, also as you pointed out, the temptation is too great for prohibitions to work. We have to develop friendly AI before we accidentally create unfriendly AI. (And for AI I hear include any sort of A-Life which has the pote

    • Re:We're headed for trouble (Score:5, Insightful)

      by groomed ( 202061 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @06:25PM (#10488336)
      This is wrong on so many levels.

      First, the practical problems involved in creating a robot that can autonomously participate in human society is far from being solved. People have been saying for over 40 years that the solution was 30 to 50 years in the future. I wouldn't expect it to arrive in a 1000 years, if ever. And yes, I study AI.

      Second, as Sartre observed, "Hell is other people". A single super robot on the loose is no match for our puny weapons. To be effective, he'd have to enlist a following. But since he's alone, those followers would have to be recruited amongst humans. But how on Earth is that ever going to happen?

      Third, you make it all sound like a video game. "Secure land, natural resources, labour...". You took a page straight out of Civilization, there.

      Fourth, there are a lot more pressing issues to worry about than what happens when a breed of superintelligent robots wants to dominate the planet.

    • Re:We're headed for trouble (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      If your robot has a strong need for self preservation, why would this automatically result in robot societies and inevitable conflict?

      Surely there's another way any robot could preserve itself: get a job. I'm serious! Assuming artificially intelligent robots aren't all-powerful laser-shooting giant killing machines, there's no reason they couldn't be as punishable by the legal system as us humans.

      I mean, last time I looked, us humans had a pretty strong need for self preservation, and we don't generally

    • Killer autonomous robots will be intentional (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Look at all the computer virii, worms, etc. released over the past 20 years. None of these were an "accident". Every single mallicous program ever created has been an intentional act.

      So considering robots and AI, if intelligent robots decide to start killing and take over the world it will be by human design before it's ever a result of robotic nature and/or independant decision. Some mallicious person will attempt to build a robot that has the skills necessary to reproduce and cause as much damange as pos

    • Naturally, the robot will have a strong need for self preservation. So it will start to secure land, natural resources, labour, spare parts, factories, and so on, and build other robots and societies to fulfill these and other purposes.

      Why wouldn't a robot that can think as well as humans (not just compute) possess other human qualities like emotions? I think I have a strong need for self preservation, and I am starting the process of securing land, natural resources, and spare parts. It's call gett

  • Catheterization robot was recently tested in Israel. The operation was broadcasted over hundreds of hospitals. Unfortunately it's not even on the news yet. I know about it because my brother-in-law was involved in R&D. This is the only place [doctors.co.il] that mentions this event, but it's in Hebrew and requires a reg. fee :(.

  • I'd like to see . . . (Score:5, Interesting)

    by StateOfTheUnion ( 762194 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @04:32PM (#10487692) Homepage
    I'd like to see how good these roller skating robots could handle a good solid roller hockey body check. Now that would be a real test of robotic balance.

    Seriously, the robot dancer/skater/stairclimber are all interesting but they run through what I assume is a static algorithm . . . what about inducing some disturbance and writing an algorithm to reject the disturbance to the robot's balance system.

    • Build the robot out of solid steel, make it 15 feet tall, and equip it with a V12 engine as a power source. Make sure to inform the press when you want to body check it, it may be the last anybody ever sees of you.

      Seriously though, resilience against the kind of force you are describing is mostly a matter of mass. Certainly the robot shown in the video clips achieves its balance by constantly accounting for the discrepancy in where it expects to be versus where its sensors tell it it actually is: it's too
      • How about a robot of size similar to that of a human? People can (with practice and skill) take a hit and deflect it, while rapidly regaining their own balance. A robot, as is, cannot come close to a similar feat.

  • When we think "robot", we think "android". (Score:3, Insightful)

    by reporter ( 666905 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @04:33PM (#10487695) Homepage
    When we think "robot", we invariably think "android": a mechanical device that appears like a human being and mimics some of its actions. We are fascinated by androids for the very same reason that we are fascinated by apes. They look like us.

    The attraction for androids is only skin deep. Today's androids are just a mass of wires. Getting a robot to walk, shake hands, play chess, etc. is substantially different from a sentient machine.

    Sentience impresses me, but a mechanical shaking hand does not.

    • The attraction for androids is only skin deep. Today's androids are just a mass of wires. Getting a robot to walk, shake hands, play chess, etc. is substantially different from a sentient machine.
      Sentience impresses me, but a mechanical shaking hand does not.

      2 words: Sex bot.
      More words: Buffy bot, Cherry 2000.

      You mentioned "skin deep", well we like skin [realdoll.com]. If you can teach it to shake hands, you can teach it to do other "tasks" as well.

      Don't look at me like that, you're all gonna buy one! ;-)
    • Sentience impresses me, but a mechanical shaking hand does not.

      I guess we can deduce how you feel about politicians then.

  • ...is alive!

  • That robot is NOT rollerskating (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Scrameustache ( 459504 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @04:49PM (#10487764) Homepage Journal
    Its walking akwardly while wearing wheels on its feet.

    Which, to anybody who's learned to skate, is of course remembered fondly as those first steps before you learned why they made you wear those uncomfortable wrist guards.

    Its a nice little robotic achievement, but its not skating.
    Actual skating would involve a phase of sliding along between "steps".
    • Well it does do that nice little turn at the beginning.

      Although maybe that's a painstakingly pre-programmed maneuver, and not a reaction to approaching the edge of the table.
    • I'm not responding directly to anyone in particular, but to the whole coalition of /. folks running around this topic who imho have failed to recognise this moment for what it is..I really just couldn't read any further through the thread w/out responding... Just everyone slow down for a moment....We have a Robot...and it IS skating around on a table like a very agile small human might, and It doesn't take a extreme leap of vision to see what is up next...I don't know about the rest of you..but watching tha
      • a Robot...and it IS skating around on a table like a very agile small human might

        It lumbers around the table akwardly, after ONE competant turn following a slide down a fixed ramp of a known lenghth and angle under controlled conditions.
        Its neat, but it is not "like a very agile small human".

        recall fondly the first time that I saw ASIMOV WALK

        Its a new feature to their not-for-sale robotic doll, not the second coming of robot Jesus.
        Cute, good work from the roboticians, but it still needs improvement: I
        • I believe you missing the point of my post. I think you are lacking in appreciation for the fact that whether or not you like it, what we witnessed in the video IS the ancestor of a better product.There is nothing else to take its spot, our own ancestors certainly will not comment on your version of a better robot... So really, all we have is the little rollerskating dude. Your perfect scenario where the robot is flawlessly doing somersaults on the table is not happening just yet. It doesn't exist. The lumb
      • I am also impressed by the roller bot (and even more by the sumo bot). It should be only a matter of time to teach the roller bot how to move effectively. He is rolling on quads, which is easier to balance on one foot than inline skates. For inline skating one definetely needs to keep dynamic balance for extended periods (as opposed to static balance), i.e. you have to give up balance in order no move forward more effectively. Therefore, inline skating somewhat harder to learn. OTOH, walking also requires
  • they can start cooking, cleaning, doing my job, wiping my ass, going to the store, and anything else i have no interest in doing. until then, having them on rollerskates almost pisses me off as much as if i had to rollerskate. and rest assured, if i were rollerskating with a bunch of those fuckers, i'd be kicking them over left and right screaming obscentities about why everyone is irritating and we need more robot-slaves.
  • (No, I don't get paid by New Scientist.)
    Obviously, you get paid by their web host who is now charging them $5 a gig overage charges.

  • Narrator [in movie]: Ordinary human dating. It's enjoyable and it serves an important purpose. [He turns the table over and a crying baby appears. He turns it back again.] But when a human dates an artificial mate, there is no purpose. Only enjoyment. And that leads to...tragedy.

    [The woman behind him turns into a blank robot and the man downloads a celebrity onto it.]

    Billy [in movie]: Neato! A Marylin Monroebot!

    Monroebot [in movie]: Ooo! You're a real dreamboat (mechanical voice) Billy Everyt

  • Personally, I'm not that impressed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by kai.chan ( 795863 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @05:16PM (#10487894)
    Making the QRIO skate is not really a big technological achievement considering that the leg motions have already been pre-programmed to get the robot to walk. It is really a matter of calculating the weights and trying to balance the robot while moving the legs to propel the robot.

    Now, if they can program a neural network that changes the leg and arm movements in relation to a physics model, and have the robot learn how to walk and skate by trail-and-error, then I'd be more impressed. THAT is what we should aim for nowadays.
    • many of the robotic dog soccer teams reprogram their AIBOs to speed up the walk/run. This requires several hours of machine learning and self-taught 'trial and error' due to minute variations in each robot's mechanical conditions.

      Its kind of creepy to walk into a dark room and hear the machinations of a dozen little robots walking back and forth for hours as they learn to walk faster.

  • Speaking of birthing simulators (Score:3, Funny)

    by MmmDee ( 800731 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @05:20PM (#10487919)
    Being an ob/gyn myself, I read the article on the birthing simulator. Reminds me of the Star Trek episode when Warf delivers a baby and says, "That's not the way it happened in the simulator." I wonder if the simulator squirts body fluids, yells and curses like real life. There's just no telling where techonology will go next. Prostate exam simulator?

    • prostate simulation (Score:2, Informative)

      by conrius ( 814609 )
      http://www.caip.rutgers.edu/vrlab/publications/pap ers/1999_ieee_tbe.pdf , prostate examination simulator, there is one for the simulation of the female pelvis too .... no telling of what can be built given the time , money and idle brains of grad students

      • Re:prostate simulation (Score:2, Interesting)

        by MmmDee ( 800731 )
        Ha, well the article's picture relieved my mind a bit regarding where my imagination was going with this (for reference, google on "Sybian"). In medical school I was amazed that living models (male/female) are trained/paid to allow hordes of medical students do various breast/pelvic/rectal exams on them. Some volunteer. I understand that in days gone by, fellow classmates "volunteered" to let other classmates examine them (rough on those early women admitted to medical school).
  • Please save us some time bringing up a player that cannot work. I have to do a search to find RealPlayer 10.

    If it's windows media or apple player only, some us using only Linux would know not to bother.
  • For men, opening an umbrella up yout ar5e, as suggested by Robin Williams in oneof his stand-up shows.
  • Christ, this looks like something that might make a good Simpsons gag. First the robot lamely slides off of a ramp (presumably to gain some speed?), then for no apparent reason it grinds to a halt. It stands motionless for a good 10 seconds before it starts moving again. The arms spread as if it's about to take off, the legs move a little, and it segues into something that looks like water ballet for geriatrics. Ugh. I don't know what to think of this.

  • They're still not doing dynamic balance (Score:3)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Sunday October 10, 2004 @06:21PM (#10488313) Homepage
    The Sony and Honda robots are still using the zero moment point [worldscinet.com] approach. This is a 35 year old way to define "stability". It's better than the old "center of mass must be over the base at all times" approach, which leads to windup toys with big feet and very slow walking. But it's worse than Raibert's legged running work from the 1980s.

    Because of this, legged robots are back to walking, rather than jogging or running. The field has regressed since Raibert and Hodgins.

  • Just like the weirdoes who grew up on star trek invented flip phones and PCs...these guys grew up on Japanese anime, where androids and 50 foot tall battlerobots are commonplace. These guys are trying to invent this stuff for real! ...and unlike us it looks like they are making some progress at least on the small scale. If you can have a robot rollerskate or do sumo moves you can replace those arms with machine guns or grenade launchers. Weve watched in Iraq how useless tanks are in cities.

    We are all actin
  • Robots needs to do some serious catching up.
    They are probably 20 years behind.

    We hardly have a HAL that can sing bad tunes.
    Or a Terminator with a speech impairment.

    Maybe too many people are taking computer courses but not (electronic) engineering.

    Can't wait to have my personal cyber-bar-maid .. mmmm luvly :)

  • I thought the porno music soundtrack they used for the robot was quite effective.
  • Best headline ever. =)
    I can seriously see how this would be important for the robot scientists, as it helps develop balancing and so forth.

Slashdot Top Deals

Work without a vision is slavery, Vision without work is a pipe dream, But vision with work is the hope of the world.

Close