Slashdot Mirror


"Living robot" Escapes Lab, Makes It To...Parking Lot

jerkychew writes "This is either really cool or really scary, depending on how you look at it. According to this article, scientists in England have been experimenting with so-called 'living robots' that think and act for themselves. During an exercise that pitted the machines against each other in battle, one of the machines, named Gaak, was taken out of the competition and left alone for fifteen minutes. When the scientist returned to retrieve Gaak, he found that the machine had broken free from its 'cage', and made it all the way to the lab's parking lot before it was apprehended! Can the T-1000 be far behind?" Update: 06/20 20:36 GMT by T : Thanks to skywalker404, who points out the Magna site and Professor Noel Sharkey's web page.

6 of 609 comments (clear)

  1. Asimov had it right by derekb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    IMHO Asimov had a few ideas that should become fundamental laws whenever self-preservation and even self-defence play a part in robotics:

    First Law:
    A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.

    Second Law:
    A robot must obey orders given it by human beings, except where such orders would conflict with the First Law.

    Third Law:
    A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Law.

    A Google Search on the laws brings up some interesting papers on the subject or another link on AI in robotics here

  2. Re:Ahh..but where would it have went? by lennart78 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Did it ever occur to him to free his robot brethren?
    If that were the case, it would be /really/ scary...

  3. FACTS, please.. by kipple · · Score: 5, Interesting
    ..that's an interesting article. Next time what's going to come up? "Geek forced to install Windows XP after bein Abducted by Aliens"?

    Come on please.. what are thos kind of "intelligent" robots?

    A google search doesn't tell me anything interesting about that.. unless it's the "magna adventure center" which the author is talking about. Or whatever.

    Could anyone provide more details about those bots? How are they programmed, how do they "think" (bah..) or anything else more interesting than a gossip? Thanks.

    --
    -- There are two kind of sysadmins: Paranoids and Losers. (adapted from D. Bach)
  4. Animal Intelligence by foniksonik · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I have to agree with this post because I have a 9 month old puppy (big puppy) who will do this when we leave and don't secure our 'cage' ie the back yard effectively.

    He (spanky) will jump up against the gate and dislodge it's latch so it comes open and run in to the drive in front of our house. It isn't a busy drive, certainly not a street so cars hitting him aren't a problem but it' intersting to see that he doesn't go farther than investigating his immediate surroundings and then looking around for us, familiar members of his pack.

    We have since the last incident completely secured the latch to avoid this particular surprise while driving away but the behavior is interesting in this context.

    He broke out of a familiar environment, navigated a semi-familiar environment and then stopped to investigate an unfamiliar environment. The robot did the same... given more time it is plausible that each would have become more familiar and have explored further into the unfamiliar.

    Animal Intelligence indeed.

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  5. Background on Magna and Living Robots exhibit by A+Masquerade · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I'll try and give you a little background on this - I actually went along there last Sunday and saw Gaak and his brethering then...


    First Magna is a "Science Adventure Centre" housed in what was a Steel works near Sheffield - this place is basically a huge shed filled with strange leftovers from the steel making, with long walkways and 4 exhibition areas inside. The whole place is done with a sort of gothic frankenstein science style - lots of sparks etc.


    The living robots part is a new exhibit organised by Dr Noel Starkey (of Sheffield University - best known for being a judge on Robot Wars). There are a total of 12 robots, of 2 basic designs (although they are apparently not completely identical within the types). The two types are predator and prey.


    Prey robots look like animated inverted wastebins with solar panels on the top. Their aim in life is to avoid being predated upon and to feed. Feeding involves soaking up energy from the light trees (2 sets of lights on the edge of the arena). I assume that the feeding etc is to demonstrate behaviour in that there is no way they could get enough energy from the solar panels on them to actually run for any length of time. The robots have 8 infra-red sensor/emitters around the shell which put out a type recognition code and detect other emitters in the area - so they can recognise other prey and ignore them, and see preditors before they ge t got.


    The preditors, of which Gaak is one, look like some form of fork lift truck. Their role in life is to find prey, grab them and lift them off the ground. They then have an arrangement where a probe enguages with a connector on top of the prey and "sucks some energy" out of the prey. Following this feeding process the preditor releases the prey and then goes torpid for a short time.


    The "intelligence" is based on some form of neural network - I didn't get details of this. At the end of each day the data on each robot is downloaded along with the neural net configurations. The 2 most successful predators have their neural nets merged to produce a new "evolved" network which is downloaded to all the predators. Similarly for the prey. Theory is that this produces an evolutionary basis for their behaviour.


    I find it hard to be convinced of this process having much real scientific value, and the displays have too little violence for a population that watches Robot Wars :-)

  6. Bad Example - harm wasn't the robot's decision by Goldenhawk · · Score: 5, Interesting

    It was the fault of the victim, or some other human decision, that got someone killed or injured in every case you mention in Japan - and anywhere else in the world.

    The reason there is no pogrom is that the robot was incapable of deciding to kill a human. The moment that becomes possible, and the first human is DELIBERATELY injured by a thinking robot, we WILL see an Asimovian response to intelligent robots.

    Asimov has proven to be incredibly perceptive, and long-sighted. You just have to think as far ahead as he does, to see the value in his thinking.

    --
    --Brandon / Split Infinity Music