Slashdot Mirror


Robot Receptionist with an Attitude

techno-vampire writes "Carnegie Mellon University is experimenting with a robot receptionist with a personality. The article on NPR tells about the receptionist, named Tank. Tank lives in a computer, with a Frankenstein-like face showing on the monitor. He responds to typed-in questions, including personal ones, with a rather curious personality courtesy of the Drama Department. Among other things, he doesn't seem to like his boss, Dr. Reid Simmons, very much. If asked, Tank will tell you he's also worked at NASA, and failed as a satellite robot. A job at the CIA was also a bust. Dr. Simmons explains that they're trying to make it easier for people to interact with robots, and upgrades are planned."

11 of 117 comments (clear)

  1. Humanity: Obsolete by Yirimyah · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Maybe they'll invent a psychotic computer. --Watterson, Calvin and Hobbes

  2. Starship Titanic, anyone? by Hosiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Flash to the adventure game of a few year's back, "Starship Titanic"? Based on Douglas Adams' work and the game had voices from members of the Monty Python troop portraying various robots and creatures. I never solved all the way through it without the cheat book, but the game environment finds one talking to the bots just to see what outrageous thing they'll say next. Just don't put this kind of thing in any kind of mission-critical function...

  3. WHY THE HELL by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Every time there's a slashdot article on robots, we can't get 50 posts into it without someone talking about fucking a female robot!?!?

  4. Do we really need one? by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, great idea. Create a robot to deal with customer service, one of the real jobs that shouldn't be replaced by robots. Replace the menial jobs that don't matter with robots, i.e. McJobs.

    1. Re:Do we really need one? by hey! · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't think the idea is to make an economically viable receptionist. Otherwise they'd have suck with Valerie. It's research.

      The idea of a social robot is interesting for several reasons. First is that our behavior and thinking is a lot more determined by those around us than we think. Also, to be successful, you have to make the robot operate "intelligently" in as many real situations as possible, as opposed to a constrained problem like chess or block world. Placing it in a public place like this and gathering data on its interactions also gives an interesting opportunit for incremental improvement. You'd expect the robot to succeed in a few cases, fail miserably in the vast number of cases, and in a very small number cases fail after showing some initial promise. This last category represents a kind of technological frontier that can be explored.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:Do we really need one? by vertinox · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, great idea. Create a robot to deal with customer service, one of the real jobs that shouldn't be replaced by robots. Replace the menial jobs that don't matter with robots, i.e. McJobs.

      Actually you couldn't be more wrong. Most customer service skills are outsourced to foreign countries as it is. Replacing those jobs wouldn't affect our market that much. (trust me... my old call center with an unnamed major ISP layed everyone off right after I quit and outsourced to India... I do still tech support over the phone, but if I got replaced with a robot it wouldn't bother me that much since most of the people that are in CS or TS phone support hate their jobs anyways and spend most of the day browsing monster.com at work)

      Secondly, a Robot would put up with shit that human would not. Screaming... Cursing... All that stuff that customers do without retorting or walking off the job. Hell it would have an "American accent" and have better english skills than you or I.

      However the trick is to fool the customer into believing the person is an uber happy person willing to give them their proverbial first born which means the thing will have to pass a turing test... ...which means not any time soon.

      --
      "I am the king of the Romans, and am superior to rules of grammar!"
      -Sigismund, Holy Roman Emperor (1368-1437)
  5. The opposite! Please replace CS desks urgently by Morgaine · · Score: 3, Insightful

    >> Create a robot to deal with customer service, one of the real jobs that shouldn't be replaced by robots.

    Your experience of Customer Service departments clearly does not match my own. The following memory will live with me forever:

    Me: Here, I'll demonstrate your service fault to you. Please telnet to your site on port 80 first.

    Verisign Customer Service: What is telnet?

    This kind of CS problem is actually not very surprising. The front desk Customer Service staff for any large business have to be the cheapest of the cheap because manpower doesn't scale and is a collosal business expense. It follows that the people are often rather poorly skilled, perhaps given only a few days training in which they learn by rote rather than acquire real understanding.

    So bring on the expert system AIs for Customer Service quickly please!! This is the ideal application.

    --
    "The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
  6. Not really all that impressive... by Improv · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Just like Valerie (the previous persona they gave to the dalek-like roboceptionist), there's nothing particularly impressive that goes into it - mix the eliza software with a few queries that can produce canned answers and the (admittedly useful) ability to look up weather around the world and find where people's offices are, and you have this thing. The public face is nothing impressive -- anyone who has seen what the Final Fantasy movies will find the graphics on this thing ridiculously primitive -- Valerie's face looked like it was generated on the fly in the age of PentiumII/200, and Tank's face is the same but less attractive. I suppose that's not the point though -- the project is intended to study human/avatar interaction, and a number of people do seem to enjoy playing with the system.

    --
    For every problem, there is at least one solution that is simple, neat, and wrong.
  7. Re:Not that different from previous roboceptionist by Iriel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I went to school at The Art Instititute of Pittsburgh (just a short bus ride away) and had done a few internship projects at CMU. I'd seen Valerie, and while I understand that this is about the advancement of robotics, AI and such, there was another fundamental flaw with it. (Please keep in mind, I'm not knocking it, this is just one gripe):

    The animations from the head could have used a serious visit from someone skilled in 3D animation. If we're talking about creating an experience like that of dealing with an actual receptionist, the visuals of the roboceptionist need to look a little more advanced than pre-Lawnmowerman. I reiterate: the idea and execution had many aspects that were very interesting about how it worked, but when trying to create a robot that functions like a person (in limited scope), it would be nice to see equal attention paid to the 'human' side of it as the robotic instead of looking like something from an 80's sci-fi movie.

    --
    Perfecting Discordia
    www.stevenvansickle.com
  8. Re:Not that different from previous roboceptionist by CreatureComfort · · Score: 1, Insightful


    Actually I think this may be deliberate to avoid Mori's Uncanny Valley. Since we have not yet advanced to the point where you can make the animation and response indistiguishable from a human, most AI researchers seem to have gone back to almost cartoonish interfaces, which people react to much better than an almost, but not quite right, photo realistic representation.

    --
    "Unheard of means only it's undreamed of yet,
    Impossible means not yet done." ~~ Julia Ecklar
  9. Re:telling us fleshies apart from robots by StalinsNotDead · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Which would you prefer: 1) A flower for your sweetheart, 2) A puppy, or 3) A Large properly formatted data file?

    --
    Thanks to the internet, we can now all die alone together! -SomeWoman