The Largest Unpiloted Legged Robot Yet 98
An unnamed correspondent writes: "Ever wanted your own dinosaur? Well
slap some skin on this baby and you could." This beast looks like a steel elephant, features unusual motor-less joints, and takes a 700Mhz CPU to control each leg.
Something I'd like to see (Score:5)
I think the british version is much better...
Will it appear on Robot Wars? (Score:1)
Will it be road tested? [robotwars.co.uk]
What I love about that show is how robots built from elastic bands, cardboard and milk bottle tops manage to beat the big guys.
Finally! (Score:2)
I haven't been this excited since I saw Kenny on South Park wearing an ED-209 halloween costume...
The end is in sight (Score:2)
4x4 SUV 's will be replaced by AT AT's
margin of error = 0 (Score:1)
So in addition to the increased mass/power supply issues of making a large robot, you can't make mistakes, which compounds the design hassles even further.
motor-less joints not unusual (Score:1)
i certainly don't know of many
watch out (Score:2)
________
Re:Slashdotted already? come one! (Score:1)
Perhaps that is what is meant by the apocolypse.
:
Re:/.-ted (Score:1)
Re:The real question is... (Score:4)
Then, you throw away the lame remote controls, and focus on some good AI routines instead.
The whole idea would increase the overall cost and time to build for each robot, but it would be so much more interesting!
Mindstorms... (Score:1)
Soon as I find a toy I like, I go get it and something better comes out. I remember growing up and getting dicked on toys, now they have all these fancy toys that change and mutate.
Stress (Score:1)
Sniff the wireless commands....AND.... (Score:3)
Re:slashdotted (Score:1)
Like a turn-of-the-century hunter returning from safari, Frank Mezzatesta stands next to a huge wooden crate he gleefully says contains something wild, a beast never before known to man. And he can hardly wait to show it off. With the click of a mouse, the front of the crate crashes to the floor, revealing an enormous metal monster 13 feet tall, 18 feet long, and weighing 11,000 pounds-- the basic statistics of a loaded delivery truck. The creature seems to hesitate for a moment, then moves forward. With deliberate but surprisingly lithe steps, it strides across the floor, shifting its weight with the grace of a cat as it lifts each foot in turn. Nearing a small group of people, it leans toward them, then sways from side to side as if trying to decide whether to charge them, eat them, or ignore them. "At this point in a previous demonstration, one woman got up and ran," says Mezzatesta. The beast then takes a few steps backward, turns slightly, and begins to dance. Swiveling left and right as much as 7 degrees, it keeps its feet in place, making large undulations and 15-inch-deep knee bends. Before it is sent back to its box, some brave observers amble over for a better look.
To understand what Dino's inventors are attempting, imagine this behemoth covered with a shell that makes it look like a dinosaur. Then imagine it roaming freely on its own-- the world's first truly autonomous robot. Photo by Jan Staller
Mezzatesta is no big-game hunter; he's an engineer, and his beast is a robot dubbed Dino. It is the largest robot ever built that has legs and doesn't have a human inside. It contains its own power and moves autonomously after receiving basic instructions like "move forward." Ultimately, a version of Dino may be covered with a skin to make it look more like a triceratops. If challenging problems are solved, it could be let loose in theme parks to roam on its own. A machine that knows where it is, can make its own decisions, and can move around as easily as a living animal has long been the Holy Grail of roboticists. No one has yet been able to achieve this feat, even with small, wheeled robots.
Birthed by Walt Disney Imagineering Research and Development, Dino was dreamed up by Danny Hillis, the man who invented massively parallel supercomputers in the 1980s. "I always wanted to build a robot dinosaur," says Hillis, who, as a Disney Fellow, ran the Dino project from 1998 until 2000, when he cofounded Applied Minds, Inc. His team of engineers and scientists was recruited from universities like the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of California at Los Angeles. They went to work in a walled-off area of a large warehouse near the airport in Burbank. To one side of the robot sits a bank of computers where they created much of Dino's software and one console that wirelessly sends the robot simple commands like "walk backward."
Beyond those commands, Dino carries everything aboard needed to control itself-- power from a bank of 55 sealed lead-acid batteries, three electric motors to move each leg, a Pentium 700 megahertz processor for each leg, and a central computer that receives commands, loads appropriate software from the onboard memory, and coordinates each leg's response. A gyroscope tells the robot how much it is leaning, and lasers at each ankle measure the distance to the ground to help calculate how a step should be taken. Sensors tell Dino how far each motor has rotated and the distance the robot has actually moved. The robot constantly compares feedback readings to make sure the multiple measurements make sense. It also monitors motors for current spikes or high temperatures to determine whether too much force is being applied, and it tracks velocity and acceleration limits.
Dino is impressive, but it is still a work in progress. Hillis originally wanted to power the robot with a Corvette V-8 engine that pressurized oil-filled hydraulic actuators. A test of that setup turned out to be far too noisy and cumbersome. Now smooth, quiet electric motors and batteries have replaced gasoline engines and hoses.
Damn lameness filter. look at my next post
________
Re:Finally! (Score:2)
Just imagine (Score:1)
Or people overclocking their 700 Mhz legs, to make them run faster...
---
Re:slashdotted (Score:1)
Small robots with legs are also easier to build because they can fall over without causing much damage-- they don't have as far to fall or as much mass. "We'd be in a whole lot of trouble if this thing fell over," says Akhil Madhani, a mechanical engineer on the project. Madhani and other designers kept Dino's legs light by putting all the motors in the shoulders and then using a series of aluminum linkages and steel ball screws to transfer power through the knees to the ankles. Still, when Dino raises a foot, its body flexes about two inches, which sends vibrations through the whole chassis. "If you have ten thousand pounds vibrating a few inches, the forces are dramatic, maybe a thousand pounds back and forth," says Alexis Wieland, an applied mathematician who worked on the robot's software. "So all the walks are smoother than you'd really think is necessary, because any jarring of the body can produce enormous forces." Worse, when Dino lifts a foot, frame-flexing changes the distance between the three feet still on the ground, trying to pull them apart. By monitoring its motor currents, which shoot up due to the increased forces, Dino can compensate. "It's another level of intelligence that says: 'I'm exactly where I want to be, but, gosh, I'm fighting myself. Let me just move a few millimeters here and, oh, there it goes; the currents are lower,' " says Mezzatesta.
When Dino's sensors don't agree with its software or one another, it stops. "It is truly autonomous; there's no preplanned trajectory," says Wieland. Without any human input, Dino can shift its weight and move its feet until the motor sensors tell it that it has reached its original starting stance. Still, the team has had to learn to trust Dino. "When you're watching something generate trajectories on the fly and you don't know up front what it's going to do and the whole thing could fall over if it does the wrong thing, it's very nice to see it do the right thing," says Madhani. "But it gets your heart rate up."
OK taco you need to explain this lameness filter thing, it keeps cutting me off, ican't see why..... read the next post for more
________
Putting robots to practial use (Score:2)
<Insert evil villain laughter here>
Gekigangar Walk!
-----
Re:slashdotted (Score:1)
Dino has laser gyroscopes that give it a balancing mechanism "sort of like an inner ear," Hillis says. "But right now it's not smart enough to take advantage of that. Once it starts being able to do that, feels itself start to trip and catches itself, I think it will start looking more and more natural. But that's a big software job and nobody's ever done it before, so it's going to take a long time. I think eventually you'll have lots of things like this walking around. Some of them will look like robots, and some of them will look like dragons, and some of them will look like big animals like rhinoceroses or woolly mammoths or imaginary animals, all kinds of things." Buehler notes that legged robots like Dino also would be able to perform extraordinary services like fire fighting, containing nuclear and chemical hazards, defusing bombs, searching for land mines, even exploring outer space. The key to all these activities, Buehler points out, is the superior mobility of legs that work as well as Dino's.
Before the gigantic robot can go anywhere, though, it must be able to make its own decisions about where it should put its foot next without stepping on someone. Eric Haseltine, who heads research and development for Disney, says his team of Imagineers is already working on such artificial-intelligence technology for virtual-reality beings, and those programs might be reusable in actual machines like Dino. "This is a test bed that puts us on a road map toward intelligent, self-directed characters," he says. "We want them to be able to move around, react, learn, and behave on their own."
Autonomous dinosaurs roaming at will are likely to amaze and amuse us, but they will still be machines run by computers, and thus unlikely to operate perfectly. So as independent as they may become, Haseltine thinks, there will always have to be someone nearby watching-- with a finger on a kill switch.
________
Re:The real question is... (Score:1)
Hey, Buddy, will you drive better with your cell phone at 5,000F?
On second thought, maybe something with jump-jets. Just no Morton Thiocol parts ...
--
Re:motor-less joints not unusual (Score:1)
From Merriam-Webster Online [m-w.com]:
Main Entry: motor
Pronunciation: 'mO-t&r
Function: noun
Etymology: Latin, from movEre to move
1 : one that imparts motion; specifically : PRIME MOVER
2 : any of various power units that develop energy or impart motion: as a : a small compact engine b : INTERNAL COMBUSTION ENGINE; especially : a gasoline engine c : a rotating machine that transforms electrical energy into mechanical energy
Definition 1 implies that almost all living-creature joints come with motors - they're called muscles. Sadly, the site is /.-ed, so who knows what exactly is being said?
....but not for Disney (Score:1)
I am sure Disney would love to have a section of Disneyland with characters from its movie "dinosaur" walking around and acting like 'real' dinosaurs. Since they have a history of pulling off (almost)cool rides, I am sure this one will be a winner too. Or, at least a money-maker.
Sooo, maybe you should buy some disney stock and donate your profit to charity.
Re:The real question is... (Score:1)
Re:slashdotted (Score:1)
________
Not to sound negative but... (Score:2)
home page n' stuff (Score:1)
[mit.edu]
http://www.ai.mit.edu/projects/leglab/robots/ro
-Jon
Streamripper [sourceforge.net]
Mirror (Score:5)
what does this remind me of? (Score:1)
2 - westworld
3 - itchy and scratchy land (where nothing can posibli go wrong)
If you dig the dino, you might like Robo sapiens (Score:1)
Check out the Amazon Link at Robo sapiens: Evolution of a new species. [amazon.com]
Re:motor-less joints not unusual (Score:1)
*shrug*
i'm sure it was prolly just the submitter, not the article being bizarre...
but yes under 1. muscles are motors, and of course anything that moves would have a motor, as something imparts motion on it, through physical contact, gravitation, magnetisim or some such thing...
Re:Flag me as flamebait, I don't give a fuck. (Score:1)
okay, so it IS a cable channel, but they should *still* be able to handle a bit of a heavy load eh?
Re:Flag me as flamebait, I don't give a fuck. (Score:1)
Reminds me of Anime... (Score:1)
------------------
why "unpiloted" robot (Score:2)
Whether the pilot is on board or 1e6km away. As the long as the maching is directed by a human it is not a robot.
I hate to see these "news" items about robots that really mean remote controlled devices. Lets keep the terms straight and not get led on by the popular notion that anything remotely high tech is a robot.
Battlebots are not robots. They are funky remote controlled cars playing a mean version of the smash up derby.
With power steering, abs brakes, and ignition control you could probably call most modern car fly by wire systems and describe them as robots using the "great" distinctions of the unwashed public.
Re:watch out (Score:5)
Elephants manage just fine on grass, and they often weigh over 10,000 pounds. In fact, they are downright stealthy on turf. Ever been snuck up on by an elephant? Talk about a good scare, I thought hair on the back of my neck would never lie back down.
I do not find in orthodox Christianity one redeeming feature.
Does it suprise anyone... (Score:1)
This is new? (Score:1)
Re:The real question is... (Score:1)
Kurdt
Re:Not to sound negative but... (Score:1)
a) build or purchase a 13'x18'x8' robot worth more than i'll ever have in my entire life, whose stability is questionable and who weighs over 5.5 tons (not sure if my freight elevator is approved for that much...)
or...
b) go out to my local sporting goods store, buy a baseball bat, and do it the old-fashioned way
why does it being called a "robot" necessarily make it so scary? humans are quite good at messing each other up already, and i really don't think 1.1 klbs of aluminum that moves by itself (sorta) is going to make that all that much easier. remember: a shotgun will always be cheaper than a Killer Robot of Death.
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
Maybe for just the movement computations. But I would imagine the added computing power is useful in analyzing the input coming from the multiple sensors used to determine height off the ground and all that other non-sense that was mentioned in the article (You did read the article didn't you? Oh wait, maybe it was slashdotted, so I'll give you a break). There's a lot more going on here than just a simple wind-up walk-along toy does. A lot more.
Honest question. (Score:1)
So if you wish to run, you'd need to process quicker. Would that mean that the faster you want to go the faster the chips?
Interesting how our mind can't compute numbers so quick but we can already run
---
Potential Disney Motive... (Score:1)
Jurassic Park: XXVII
Well,the movies could be filmed in real time without having to wait for a render farm to create your effect!
Come to think of it, the technology could have a couple practical uses -- mobile autonomous camera control, rough-terrain heavy equipment transport, automatic bug squisher... OK, I'm stretching, but you get the idea.
In addition, if Disney ever decides to license or share this technology, imagine what such a robot could be used for... Earthquake rescue, anybody? Terrorist negotiations? Unmanned ice-cream vendor? (it'll be a real hit with the kiddies at the park!)
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
I wasn't able to get back on to the page to check, but I don't remember a great level of detail on the computations that are being done. Non-linear control problems associated with robotics aren't generally thought of as the easiest thing in the world. There's a lot of math behind the stabilization of non-linear systems. It's possible that they are using a fairly computationally intensive method. This would not be like slapping together a PID controller and tuning the parameters until it can walk without falling over.
Whether they really need 700MHz processors in each leg, I can't say. But it's not a possibility you could dismiss without knowing a fair bit about non-linear control methods and what method was used in particular in this case. In any event these processors are going to be doing a hell of a lot more than "telling" the legs to move up and down regularly.
finally..... (Score:1)
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
But robocop good too. .
I have a shotgun, a shovel and 30 acres behind the barn.
Re:The real question is... (Score:1)
A really good AI should be better at disabling opponents, because it can much better coordinate the use of several degrees of freedom. The reason human drivers suck is that they are trying to remotely manipulate their bots with an incredibly low bandwidth connection (human fingers). Robots designed to have microsecond reflexes would rock.
I do agree, at least at first, an autonomous divison would be much more fun for the participants, but much less fun for the spectators. But I think it is possible.
Re:watch out (Score:1)
The weight isn't that bad if it has big feet (and it does). Those feet are probably bigger than the contact patches of a truck's tires, so it can go anywhere a truck could.
Look at your leg. (Score:4)
-russ
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
I'm sure that they designed it to be a little "overkill" too. Shit, this thing weighs 11,000 pounds, is mostly all custom made parts, etc... Another $500 is bullshit for this project.
Oh. I'm assuming height off ground is provided by a laser system that does its own calculations.
So I'm somewhat redeemed, if not entirely clear.
Like I said, its monday. I need coffee.
and wow, it is dead.
fuck.
we just killed discover.com, even the front page is dead.
I have a shotgun, a shovel and 30 acres behind the barn.
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
I'm sure that they designed it to be a little "overkill" too. Shit, this thing weighs 11,000 pounds, is mostly all custom made parts, probably cost a shitload for the metal alone. etc...
Another $500 is bullshit for this project.
I have a shotgun, a shovel and 30 acres behind the barn.
That's a lot of CPU power (Score:1)
Re:A 700 MHz CPU for each leg... (Score:5)
With the 4x700MHz PIIIs, that's significantly more processing power than your average dinosaur brain, and they walked a lot better than this beast.
Time to give up on this problem, chaps. AI researchers used to work on chess, because they thought they could never brute force the problem. Now they've done the same to walking. Time to move on to face recognition, or something else.
--
Re:The real question is... (Score:1)
LetterJ
Head Geek
Freenet Mirror (Score:1)
freenet:CHK@L~ijwvGY4muOIqcqPb2HSBlhxEYOAwE,Ol4HR
freenet:KSK@www.discover.com/mar_01/featrobots.
Re:Sniff the wireless commands....AND.... (Score:5)
-Vercingetorix
Von Neuman (Score:2)
--
Re:Something I'd like to see (Score:1)
Re:margin of error = 0 (Score:1)
No match for Mechanized Propulsion Systems! (Score:1)
While this thing is nifty, it's still no match for the real mech that Mechanized Propulsion Systems is putting together
Mechanized Propulsion Systems [mechaps.com] say they're building a real mech, full size and human piloted!!!! Check them out :-)
Re:Not to sound negative but... (Score:1)
___
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
Plus, if the leg movement is based on corrective movement, a faster processor will minimize the vibration caused by minute changes in position.
___
Re:[Semi-OT] Autonomous battlebot silliness (Score:2)
Well I think you said it... you'd probably get plenty of entries, but maybe more from colleges and companies than individuals.. or perhaps not..I'd certainly never build an r/c bot (dull), but an autonomous one would be more fun!
As well as the aerial robotics thing (a bit too hard, really!), there's also the autonomous robotics soccer competition - teams of opposing robots. Not only do these things track each other and the ball in real time, but they can plan intercept paths to hit the moving ball, and even manage to plot intercept paths to pass the ball to each other! Rather than having a dumb selfish "each man for himself algorithm", the better ones at least use team play. I remember reading about one team who's genetic algorithm optimized team algorithm resulted in player roles and positioning very similar to those in real life soccer!!
There's a web site for the competitions - should be easy to find. AAAI magazine also covers the competitions.
Re:Something I'd like to see (Score:2)
Plus Robot Wars, (what its called) the few episodes I have seen were hosted by Craig Charles ("Lister" of "Red Dwarf") who is a lot funnier than those idiots on Comedy Central. IMO.
Re:A 700 MHz CPU for each leg... (Score:2)
If you want to see better walkers then hed over to the MIT web site and visit their "leg lab". This is where walking/hooping/etc robots originated. They even have one with one leg that hops up and down like on a pogo stick!
Re:Something I'd like to see (Score:1)
1) house robots. these things are cool, they try to get either player
2) THe deathtraps are much cooler....can you say flamming pit of fire.
3) better robots...dont know why, they are just better
4) better announcers....hey they just suck less
compared to other robot diosaurs (Score:2)
Re:Something I'd like to see (Score:1)
Do they show the British version on American TV?
They had Adam Corrola (and his man show sidekick) as guests on Battlebots, and they were pretty funny, but I agree the hosts suck.
Re:A 700 MHz CPU for each leg... (Score:2)
Re:[Semi-OT] Autonomous battlebot silliness (Score:1)
Or...
http://www.mae.cornell.edu/robocup/RoboCup.html
These robots are super-cool!
The Cornell link has a bunch of other autonomous vehicle info too.
Re:Sniff the wireless commands....AND.... (Score:1)
Gridlock (Score:1)
If it is supposed to give people the right of way (probably a good idea), how will one of these things get anywhere in a Disney theme park? Those places are generally packed shoulder to shoulder.
___
Re:Something I'd like to see (Score:1)
Re:A 700 MHz CPU for each leg... (Score:2)
--
Re:Something I'd like to see (Score:1)
Re:Something I'd like to see (Score:1)
Apparently, in the British version, the robot makers actually practice with their robots for more than 15 minutes before the show.
Re:home page n' stuff (Score:1)
Re:watch out (Score:1)
> patches of a truck's tires, so it can go
> anywhere a truck could.
I.e. cement roads, tar roads, and roads of hard-packed, dry dirt, on all of which it can carefully step over the boulders all over such roads.
Re:A 700 MHz CPU for each leg... (Score:1)
Re:Something I'd like to see (Score:1)
Re:home page n' stuff (Score:1)
-Jon
Streamripper [sourceforge.net]
Re:slashdotted (Score:1)
________
Re:watch out (Score:1)
Re:A 700 MHz CPU for each leg... (Score:5)
The first big insight on the problem was when Raibert figured out that balance is more important than gait. Locomotion researchers had been obsessing on gait all the way back to Muybridge, and never understood gaits beyond the walk. That's why Raibert did the one-legged hopper, which forced him to focus on balance. This provided the insight that cracked running. The basic concept is that in stance, the goal is to level the body, and in flight, the goal is to land with the foot at the "zero point" landing point which will maintain the current speed and direction. Displacing the landing point slightly from the zero point results in a turn or speed change, and that's how you steer. Very neat.
My big insight on this is that traction control is more important than balance. I figured out (and, of course, patented [delphion.com]) how to do anti-slip control for legs. This is necessary to run on hills. [animats.com] One interesting result was that it finally became clear why legs have three joints, considering that two are sufficient to place the foot anywhere. The third (ankle on human, hock on the quadrupeds) joint gives the ability to control the direction of the contact force, which is a big win on non-flat surfaces. This is most true for animals like horses, which have hind legs with three sections of about equal length, but it's true for humans, too. Try climbing in rigid ski boots that lock the ankle joint.
Lots of people have built walkers. It's building a runner that makes it serious.
RoboTech (Score:1)
Re:Something I'd like to see (Score:2)
Which would work fairly well, considering their robots.
----
Re:Honest question. (Score:1)
Re:Hmm... (Score:1)
video of a bipedal robot walking (Score:3)
"// this is the most hacked, evil, bastardized thing I've ever seen. kjb"
Re:Not to sound negative but... (Score:1)
But the human race hasn't been wiped out by either of those invetions.
I think that you should be more worried about gun control and car laws at the moment.
I don't see how someone would be alowed to just go around with one of thses things and knock people out. Someone could do the same thing with a baseball bat. Just becasue it's a new peice of technology. Dosn't mean the laws change.
Although. you do have a good point about the future. when AI starts to get more of the I in it.
hardly.... (Score:1)
Hardly! I'm not even a biologist. But I know that probably isn't true, considering how much we don't know about our own brains for starters.
Just becasue a dinosaur can't do maths aswell as, or as fast as, a computer, it dosn't mean it isn't as powerfull. Don't foget that a dino, or human brain has to control far more muscles than that robot. than there's the fact that it dosn't have to worry about a complex digestive system. Blood and oxgen curcualtion, high res vision, millions of touch, temperature sensors all over the body. And of course the biggy... that they can't learn in the same way as we, or dino's do/did.
Don't forget, brains work in an entirely differnt way to a computer chip. A computer chip can only do simple things fast (0's and 1's). And that's about it.
Can you imagine... (Score:1)
But seriously, that's essentially what the bot's control system sounds like...
So when will we see something like this on Battlebots?
Thank you! (Score:1)
Not necessary (Score:1)
Couple problems with that conspiracy theory...
1) The cost to build one of these things would be far greater than the cost of the largest rendering farms.
2) 3D render speeds seem to be doubling at nearly _twice_ the rate of Moore's Law [intel.com]. A frame that takes an hour to render today, will take only 15 minutes to render in 18-24 months.
Have you seen some of the GeForce3 footage [nvidia.com]??
It won't be long before movies like Jurassic Park will be rendered in real time at studios... and not long after that, in our own homes. But by then studios will probably have replaced most actors (and sets) with inexpensive, high quality CGI dopplegangers, thus increasing total production time again to several years.
Re:No match for Mechanized Propulsion Systems! (Score:1)
The closest thing we have to mecha in our future will probably be a decendant of Asimo [honda.com].
Re:Not to sound negative but... (Score:1)
Governments, however, will be interested in this technology -hello BattleMechs!!
Re:The real question is... (Score:2)
Look at a good pianist. I don't think the bandwidth limitation is with human hands and fingers. Radio remote controls as used in battlebots are legacy systems, designed to control model cars and kludged to control model airplanes. These applications don't involve combat and really just don't require that much bandwidth.
I also think that microsecond reflexes are probably overkill; useful reflex time is limited by the inherent acceleration and deceleration times of the robot's parts. Even cats and mongeese get by with millisecond reflexes.
I'd like to see somebody design a battlebot where they focus on a high-bandwidth control system rather than a bad-ass weapon. (Most of the weapons end up looking pretty lame anyway.) Video cameras are cheap these days, so no reason the operator can't where a headset that gives him a robot's-eye vantagepoint. There are analog joysticks and 6DOF controllers. Bitstreams from multiple controllers could easily [unc.edu] be shipped over a radio channel (though it probably makes sense to keep the video stream separate [x10.com].
Re:Not to sound negative but... (Score:1)
People have this impression that because chips are getting faster, and more software is in circulation, the practice must be advancing at a tremendous rate. It's ain't. Advances in software are few and far between, and take decades to become widely accepted (think OO, or functional programming). The quality of software hasn't improved much, and may even have dropped some. Complexity is up, but it's mostly the result of bloat on existing systems and not the gobs of new functionality. Even hardware isn't moving that quickly if look at architectures; how long have the basic IA32, Sparc, MIPS, etc, designs been around?
AI is, if anything, worse off. It's both a software field and a science with close ties to psychology. It's stuck with both to sad state of engineering, and the slow, evolutionary methods of science. The appearance that AI is quickly advancing is mostly the result of poor reporting and confusion between the actual state and predicted state of the art. Every time some looney writes a book about nano-AI's taking over the world, that story gets run on /. and a billion other places and people come away with the
impression that we're on the verge of having little AI's. We aren't. We aren't even on the verge of big AI's. Assuming we can actually build one -- and that's still a huge if -- it'll be decades, maybe centuries, and it's will probably be far more alien than anyone gives AI credit for.
Re:A 700 MHz CPU for each leg... (Score:1)
I think that one of the reasons that animals 'have it so easy' is that we've got so many more sensors, as well as the 'circuitry' to put all of that sensory data together. And I don't mean the strict inner-ear stuff, either. I mean the somatosensory (joint position and such) senses. How many robots 'know' where all of their limbs are as easily as I can know exactly where my hand is with my eyes closed? Furthermore, humans (and presumably other animals) have the benefit of learning exactly what works for their body, motion-wise. If my brain was suddenly put into the body of someone differently sized than mine, I'd probably be unable to walk for a while. I'm guessing that most robots don't have the benefit of years of experience learning how to move optimally. This kind of thing is why it needs a 700Mhz processor in each leg.
And another thing is that, however it gets that way, the brain tissue that controls movement and the coordination is optimized, both to begin with and then fine-tuned over time. If robotics researchers could make the equivalent of a DSP for balance and coordination, I'm sure the specs would appear much more 'reasonable.' After all, a quad Pentium III system running, say, a chess program will tend to lose to a world-class human chess player, and chess is an inherently mathematical problem! Walking is so much more...well, certainly not mathematical, really.
Anyway, those are just some of my idle ramblings on the subject. Maybe that helps, I dunno.
(One thing I question is your notion of more than half of the human brain being devoted to coordination and balance...doing some searching reveals that, from the brain diagrams I looked at, roughly a tenth of the frontal lobe is given over to 'movement.' Also, some parts of the basal ganglia are involved with inhibitory balance, reflexes, and the initiation of voluntary movement. Coordination, by which I mean the coordination of multiple sensory inputs and movements, is the domain of the right hemisphere, but I imagine that's not all of what it does. Also, that definition of coordination seems substantially separate from simple balance. That is, it's gymnastics and playing the piano, not walking while whistling. It may take a large chunk of the human brain, but it's so much more than what robots can do now that I imagine that it would only take a small portion of it to replicate simple movement and things like rubbing your stomach while patting your head (which is a silly example, I know).