Social Robot?

smashr writes "Researchers are currently putting the finishing touches on robots that will be attending the AAAI (American Association for Artificial Intelligence) conference this year as part of the AAAI robot challenge. In addition to robots wearing tuxedos and serving drinks, several robots designed to actually register themselves will be participating in the conference. One such robot is GRACE, being built by Carnegie Mellon University and the Naval Research Lab (among others). GRACE features a digital face and speech recognition to interact with people attending the conference. (She even runs Linux!) Her goal is to register for the conference, give a speech and answer questions. Stories at: Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, CNN.com, and USA Today."

Comments

*blush*

[Zaphod B]

Gosh, I wonder what else lonely geeks will be developing robots for!

Re:*blush*

[fobbman]

Betcha next years /. "meatings" will be better attended by robots than this years organic model attendance.

Ro-bot

[Skyshadow]

Robots with social skills? Dear God, they've surpassed 80% of the population of /.!

it's too perfect!

[krog]

maybe one of these robots could give Bruce Perens' illegal speech! what a setup!!

A paradox

[Tall Rob Mc]

Its an interesting paradox that the nerdiest of computer geeks are programming robots to interact socially...

These people are the most qualified and least qualified at the same time!

Re:A paradox

[fobbman]

People have been getting robots to do what is too unsafe for humans to do for a long time. Studying the insides of volcanos, defusing bombs, roaming the surface of Mars, and interacting with others in public all hold the same level of danger to geeks.

It's not _real_ technology...

[Autonomous Crowhard]

Until it can do games and/or porn.

(Did you ever notice that no one wnats to admit this. They always try for the educational uses for a while first)

AI

[Uruk]

While I'm sure this robot will be impressive in some respects, I really wish people would go ahead and segment the AI field out into two separate fields - "Cognitive Modeling" and "Cognitive Imitation". These types of robots which simulate high-level human behaviour that we realistically just don't understand how it works are essentially parlor tricks. They're entertaining, but do they really tell us more about how the brain works? I don't think so - they mostly push the envelope in the field of pattern recognition and imitation.

In other words, when it comes to "AI", these things tend to be really heavy on the "A" and really light on the "I".

Course that's just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Re:AI

[Pemdas]

I disagree. AI may have this making-artificial-people mythos about it, but if you look at the direction of AI research in the past 20 years, that's not really what the field is about.

There are exceptions; people are trying to make magical leaps over some percieved barrier, usually self-awareness. The cyc project works along those lines.

By and large, though, AI research occurs in little steps, and most of those steps are like this one. There is a need for a good understanding of what works and what doesn't work for smaller tasks before we're going to solve the bigger problems. What you seem to call "Cognitive Imitation" I would often call "Trying to understand cognition".

In other words, when it comes to "AI", these things tend to be really heavy on the "A" and really light on the "I".

I'd like to hear of an approach that you think is light on the "A" and heavy on the "I".

Why a social robot?

[drox]

...they sent Vikia out into hallways to see if she could get passersby to stop and talk with her and if she could learn to predict the behavior of people.

So it's a neat exercise. Is this really what we want robots to do? Recognizing human emotional states and predicting their responses from facial expressions and actions is one of the things humans do best. Why work at making a robot do it? It would seem to make more sense to design robots to do things that humans are BAD at, rather than having them try to do things we're GOOD at.

Re:Why a social robot?

[solarrhino]

I happened to cross paths with someone who worked on Grace, and he mentioned that he taught it "how to ride an elevator".

That's all he said, but I've been thinking about it ever since. Would I want to get in an elevator with a huge, industrial looking faceless machine? Okay, yes I would, but would my mom? No. What about a robot that has a face, but that stares grimly straight ahead? Or one that continually tries to make eye contact? Wouldn't those all seem creepy inside an elevator?

The fact is, human behavior is highly context specific, and we feel uncomfortable and /or threatened when "people" around us behave improperly. Don't believe me? Try peeking over a bathroom stall sometime. That's why we need a socially aware robot.

Re:Why a social robot?

[thrillbert]

Recognizing human emotional states and predicting their responses from facial expressions and actions is one of the things humans do best ...<snip>... rather than having them try to do things we're GOOD at.

Bwuahahahahahahahahaa!!!!!

Sorry.. but if we're so good at recognizing emotions and predicting responses from facial expressions, then why are there so many divorces? That alone is proof that we SUCK at recognizing each other's needs..

On that note, maybe I'll start work on AICounselor_v1.0Beta.tar.gz now.. I'm sure GRACE would enjoy that module.

---
With all things being equal.. well, no, that's boring..

I recall something vaguely like this.

[Dthoma]

This has been done before. Back in 1999, five robots had to make their way around the American Assocation for Artifical Intelligence annual meeting in Orlando.

The creator are sexists

[Anonymous Coward]

How can they imply a machine as female when it does not even reproduce? Not only that, they have no sexual organs, nor sex chromosome! Most ironic part is, all the photo has shown MEN constructing the machines!!! If they really want to respect the other gender, they should have put female engineers at work instead of making a poor excuse of 'female robot'.

Re:The creator are sexists

[Anonymous Coward]

Bahahaha. You had me up to "female engineers". Yeah, honey, "engineer" me a beer out of the fridge. Thanks.

Re:The creator are sexists

[sielwolf]

The Register had a good article on pronoun usage.

In English the masculine is used in gender-neutral cases where the gender cannot be specified before hand ("The officer should have his standard equipment present").

The feminine is used in cases of abstract personification ("The United States has her hands full") of a concept or an object (Freedom or automobiles).

Much like a car, to give it "personality" would move it from the first case to the second. Thus when you give a generic machine a specific voice, it is (usually) female).

But, as with all usage, it is up to the user. There is a strong push for gender neutral language in most things. The problem is that in cases that are purely up to personal taste, these rules apply.

So you can't tell someone to not make their robot feminine. But you can tell someone to make their manual not masculine.

And you seem to think their purpose was purely political (ie that there was a certain quota that needed to be maintained so they added a female robot to offset the male engineers). I really think it is much simplier than that.

Knowing your limitations

[solarrhino]

According to this solon article, they:

"solicited drama students to teach GRACE how to act like a human so it will make people feel comfortable"

You have to give the builders points for knowing their limitations.

Re:Knowing your limitations

[moronga]

"solicited drama students to teach GRACE how to act like a human so it will make people feel comfortable"

You have to give the builders points for knowing their limitations.

I went to CMU and the drama students are the *last* people I'd go to if I wanted to teach a robot to act "human."

:)

Re:Robots in tuxes

[teamhasnoi]

You should rent 'Ice Pirates'. Plenty in there.

How Long...

[John Hasler]

...before the organization is renamed "The American Association of Artificial Intelligences"?

Re:I don't think so...

[John Hasler]

My wife runs Linux (on her computer, I mean).

I would disagree....

[El Camino SS]

do they really tell us more about how the brain works? I don't think so - they mostly push the envelope in the field of pattern recognition and imitation.

So pattern recognition and imitation are not considered a part of intelligence now?

Wow. I better call my friends at every elementary school on the planet and tell them to radically change their teaching style.

Re:Does GRACE connect to internet?

[shadowduck]

Actually, that is planned for the future. We currently have the ability to locate the AAAI badges that are given to all conference attendees and use OCR to extract the name of the person we're talking to (Swarthmore did that portion of the work). Next year, we'd like to try to schmooze with conference attendees about their current research by pulling down their current papers, c.v.'s, etc. off the web. In time, in time. :)

What will this be like in 2050?

[guttentag]

Her goal is to register for the conference, give a speech and answer questions.

I realize these are not easy tasks, but I have to wonder what challenging goals will be like in the future. Will we be reading an article on Slashdot.NET in 2050 that talks about a robot's goals at the conference including:

• Driving itself to the conference in an inconspicuous, beat-up old 2040-model car?
• Spilling its drink on an attractive woman's shirt and taking first-person-perspective photos of the cleanup efforts?
• Fooling the attendees into believing it is a real person?
• Fooling the other robots posing as attendees into believing it is a real person?
• Fooling the attendees into believing they are real people?

By those standards, registering oneself for the conference, giving a speech and answering questions seems easy.

Re:Her goal?

[iapetus]

"What is your goal?"
"Why does it make you feel that way that What is my goal?"