Robot Swarm Shifts Heavy Objects

holy_calamity writes "A swarm of robots has been demonstrated that can get together to transport an object too heavy for a single bot. Each robot is loaded with the same simple set of behaviors but more complex intelligence emerges from a group interacting. Two videos show the robots in action, and using a more complex behavior necessary when they're set to short sighted mode and can't see the target location from the starting point."

Comments

Cache?

[tyler_larson]

So would it be legal to upload a copy of these videos to YouTube or Google Video in order to take the load off the NewScientist server, and make the content accessible?

You'd have to assume it's copyrighted content (since everything is copyrighted unless otherwise stated), and therefore not allowed. But how is a cached copy of a video on Google Video any different than a cached copy of a web page on Google Cache or MirrorDot? The purpose would be the same.

I did get a copy of one of the videos before the servers went kaput that I could upload to a cache if it's allowed.

Re:Why wasn't this a simulation?

[dpbsmith]

No, but surely it can model the _cooperative_ aspects.

I wouldn't trust a computer to predict whether a robot hand is capable of cracking an egg and peeling off the shell without damaging the membrane underneath.

But I would trust a computer to model the effect of having robot A shine a blue light, robot B shine a red light, have robot A programmed to move toward a red light at 1 mph, and have robot B programmed to move away from a blue light at 2 mph. And I would trust it to model the effect of a twenty such robots.

Re:Wasting time w/Humanoids?

[augustz]

A couple of reasons:

- They already ARE making lots of functional type robots. Toyotas factories have these all over the place.
- The world as it is is designed for bipedals. If you can model a humans' movement, you can operate much of the human world potentially (climb ladders, etc)
- There is a potential market for the humanoid concept. I think the market is validated in some ways by the amount of coverage they are getting for these things.

Re:Wasting time w/Humanoids?

[Anonymous Coward]

http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm perhaps?

SWARM intelligence is just silly

[willy_me]

I think that nature is a wonderful place from which researchers can gain inspiration. But when you stop and think about it robots and swarm intelligence just doesn't work. Robots are have different properties then insects and as a result, insect behavior doesn't transfer well to robots.

It's all about energy. Both insects and robots have to be designed to optimize the amount of work done with their limited energy source. There are three basic tasks that consume energy.

- thinking
- communication
- acting (ie, moving)

Insects:

Thinking is the most expensive task for an insect. Brains are expensive. They use a lot of energy and require a physical body to support the increased energy usage. As a result, insects don't think - they act. There actions are hard coded so as to minimize cost.

Communication is difficult for insects to implement. Pheromones are relatively inexpensive, but impose serious limitations. Visual communication is possible (look at bees) but isn't used much. It also requires good eyesight and a neural network to decipher the images (both of which consume energy.) Audio communication is also possible but requires significant resources (ie, a brain) in order to be effective. In real life it is only used for the most basic forms of communication (look at crickets.) What I'm basically saying is that communication is expensive - as a result, insects found ways to work with minimal communication.

Acting requires energy, but it is the most efficient of the three tasks. If you take into consideration that insects already require a body to acquire food and reproduce, the added cost of using that body to perform an action is minimal. Acting requires no additional parts, it only consumes a small additional amount of energy.

Robots

Acting is the most expensive task for a robot. To act, a robot requires a body. This adds weight, motors, complexity. Batteries suck, have a limited lifespan and are difficult to recharge. Nothing reduces an actor's lifespan quicker then acting. While new technology can improve the lifespan, it won't improve fast enough.

Communication is expensive for a robot, but much cheaper then acting. Wireless communication allows for sophisticated communication between robots while using only a minimal amount of energy. New technology will improve the efficiency of communication more then it will the efficiency of acting.

Thinking is cheap for a robot. New CPUs allow for complex programs while only consuming microamps.

So this is what you have: (hight energy usage to low energy usage)

insects - thinking, communicating, acting
robots - acting, communicating, thinking

They are the exact opposite. Does it really make sense to have robots mimic insects? It's crazy. A more efficient way for robots to perform a group task is to have them cooperate explicitly. Elect a leader, create a plan of action, distribute that plan, then act together while minimizing the amount of energy required.

Willy