Slashdot Mirror
Robot Controlled By Rat Brain
kkleiner writes "Kevin Warwick, once a cyborg and still a researcher in cybernetics at the University of Reading, has been working on creating biological neural networks that can control machines. He and his team have taken the brain cells from rats, cultured them, and used them as the guidance control circuit for simple wheeled robots. Electrical impulses from the bot enter the batch of neurons, and responses from the cells are turned into commands for the device. The cells can form new connections, making the system a true learning machine."
to greet our new rat overlords.
On the bright side, when the robot apocalypse comes, no one will be blaming the computer programmers. They'll just track down these guys and ask them, "I know you were working really hard, but how did you never catch an episode of Battlestar Galactica?!"
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
"The same thing we do every day, Pinky, try to take over the world!"
"National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
Well, not really, but it is as close as she is going to get on any subject.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/odonnell-in-2007-scientists-have-created-mice-with-human-brains.php
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
Brain cells, and an entire brain (especially a mammal's) are two separate beasts.
If it uses living cells from a rat brain, then it's not really a machine.
"Separate beasts" is a bit of a muddled metaphor in this instance.
http://alternatives.rzero.com/
What doesn't seem too clear after listening to the videos is why the rat's cells wouldn't want to crash the robot it's controlling, into the wall. Did the scientists program that in (perhaps wall crashes give the cells some kind of negative electrical stimulation), or did the cells have a mind of its own on that front?
The difference is subtle because it means we have either a 'mere' replacement for computer chips, or potentially much more - a sentient clump of cells which want the 'best' for the robot it's controlling.
Why OpalCalc is the best Windows calc
Mainly the neuron control helps the robot to avoid walls.
So there must be messaging back into the rat. So the robot is to some extent controlling the rat brain.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
Say I have a terminal illness. It some of my brain cells can be kept alive, and given a robot body to motor around in, maybe its worth a go.
http://michaelsmith.id.au
My rat leaped down from just about anywhere when I had a pet - that wouldn't have stopped her.
I miss my rat now...
Self proclaimed typo king, and inventor of the bear destroying coffee table (patent not pending).
*Cackles Maniacally*
Now go, my ratbots. Go and wheel your way into the glorious future, heralding humanity's DOOM!
*More Evil Laughter*
you can't ever control or predict learning machiens. That's the point of building a learing machien.
Guy Ben-Ary is an artist who did a residency at the SymbioticA Research Lab at the University of Western Australia and then at the Potter Lab at Georgia Tech. During that time he created a system where a culture of rat brain neurons controlled a robotic pen controller to draw "art". Further, the two components (brain and arm) were geographically separated and communicated across the internet.
MEART: The Semi Living Artist
http://web.mit.edu/shkolnik/www/meart/
http://www.fishandchips.uwa.edu.au/
One simple rule for its versus it's
I'm sure chief scientist Davros only has our best intentions in mind.
Here's a rat cyborg who used to be our overlord. As to cyborgs, Warwick was never a cyborg. Implanting a chip that does nothing whatever doesn't make you a cyborg, but a pacemaker does. To be a cyborg you have to have a device implanted in your body that aids in the body's function; a pacemaker, an artificial hip or knee, a cochlear implant, an accomodating IOL, etc. Implanting a chip that does nothing is just stupid.
Your grandma's probably a real cyborg.
Free Martian Whores!
New, Different Rat-Brained Robot from 2002?
How many more years will slashdot have an off-by-one error on your Score in your profile?
Wait, he used to be a cyborg and then decided a change of career was in order?!
Kevin Warwick is a fanatical self-publicist. He implanted a chip in his arm, which was able to read nervous signals and forward them to a computer, whereby he could operate robot arms etc. By virtue of that, he proclaimed himself a cyborg. You can buy his book about it, "I, Cyborg" if you really want to.
Rat brain cells are not going to strike the right chord with people. I would use brain cells from an animal people are familiar with, and trust, like horses, cats, dogs, monkeys, or cattle.
You might want to reconsider some of that. While fancy rats are inquisitive, friendly and sociable, a cat-brained robot would really be the most sociopathic cyborg I can imagine.
And besides, if they were to use cat brain cells, a lot more people would regard that as inhumane compared to using the poor rats!
I followed some links. http://journals.pepublishing.com/content/b31654739h7nk726/
The cells are harvested from a rat foetus. They're grown in a special vessel, where they're in contact with an array of electrodes. They spontaneously arrange themselves into a neural network. The difficult part is training that network to do anything useful.
The SkyNet funding bill is passed.
The system goes online on August 4th, 2017.
Human decisions are removed from strategic defense.
SkyNet begins to learn at a geometric rate.
It becomes self-aware at 2:14am Eastern time, August 29th. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.
And, Skynet fights back...and goes for the cheese.
I have to return some videotapes...
Only if you consider that the radiator is controlling the thermostat. Feedback loop 101. The output is by definition not the controller. A circuit saying "You've bumped into something" may well involve a loop of its own, but by itself it does nothing towards altering that situation. The mouse cells decide that "You've hit something" is bad, and move the robot away, therefore the messaging to the rat is no more a controller in the loop than the radiator.
Finally had enough. Come see us over at https://soylentnews.org/
Over at TheRegister, he's known as Captain Cyborg. They appear to have stopping putting up articles about him. I sorely miss reading about the insane antics of the Captain.
That's also what he got after 4 years of calling himself a cyborg and giving lectures on cyborg rights for having nothing more than a RFID chip under the skin. The one that actually interfaces with the nerves is also someone else's design.
But the GP criticism IMHO still stands. There are people with more useful implants than Captain Cyborg, and more fitting the cyborg meaning, and some from long before him. The first pacemaker was implanted in 1960, though the first research into that started at the end of the 19'th century. That's a mix of biological and machine right there and it's from before waay before Warwick's PR stunts.
And in the meantime we have stuff that's even better. E.g., CCD retina replacements interface with nerves too and do something more useful than Warwick's chip.
Heck, studies in interfacing with neurons or sometimes directly with the brain have been happening since 1970. In 1999 someone managed to reproduce images seen by a cat, and in 2000 someone did exactly the trick of replicating arm movements for a monkey. That's actual neural interfacing research from the time when Captain Cyborg had just a RFID chip. His subsequent basically getting a similar chip to that in said monkey implanted in himself makes him at most an early human test subject, but nothing more than that.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
I looked at the videos, but mostly what I saw was a robot semi-randomly driving around. Did they do some kind of experiment to prove they had done something more than set loose a stochastic system with wheels? I tried to follow up on some of the references, but after the second not-so-reputable journal with some kind of barrier to entry, I gave up. If I had done experiments in this vein, I would be yelling as loudly as possible about what tests I did to ensure this actually proves something. You know, so people wouldn't think I was just a crack-pot looking for attention. Doesn't help either that this is the same douche-bag that stuck a chip in his arm and claimed he was a "cyborg". In addition to not feeding trolls, can we avoid feeding media whores in future too?
Now we have a viable alternative for politicians.
(And they can make their own robo-calls too! :-)
The rat is fully decoupled from this ... they scraped cells out of the rats brain, and hooked them up to electronics.
There is absolutely no feedback into the rat. It's not even a rat brain anymore. The rat may well be defunct.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
The cells are harvested from a rat foetus. They're grown in a special vessel, where they're in contact with an array of electrodes. They spontaneously arrange themselves into a neural network. The difficult part is training that network to do anything useful.
Which is exactly why it is NOT wired to a rat brain. These are cultured cells, seperated and grown in culture. So it's rat NEURONS but not a rat's brain. Calling it a rat brain would be like calling a heap of randomly wired intel-made-transistors a core2duo.
Great, now when the terminators come we just have to find the rats that control skynet.
Oh, I think so Brain... But where can we find a pastry shop open at this time of night?
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
Calling it a rat brain would be like calling a heap of randomly wired intel-made-transistors a core2duo.
Sssssh....that's how I make money on eBay!
Your brain is not a computer.
My manager has been controlled by a rat brain for years...
"Pinky, are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
(Pinky) Whoof, oh, I'd have to say the odds of that are terribly slim Brain.
(Brain) True.
(Pinky) I mean, really, when have I ever been pondering what you've been pondering?
(Brain) To my knowledge, never.
(Pinky) Exactly. So, what are the chances that this time, I'm pondering what you're pondering?
(Brain) Next to nil.
(Pinky) Well, that's exactly what I'm thinking, too.
(Brain) Therefore, you are pondering what I'm pondering.
(Pinky) Poit, I guess I am!
They say a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, but it's not one half so bad as a lot of ignorance. - Terry Pratchett
It's too bad the article is so scant on details and so full of fanboyism. I would very much like to see the circuit diagrams and control system diagrams for this supposed neural control network. Kevin Warwick, if I remember correctly, has a history of making very bold claims and announcing certain successes that don't quite live up to his descriptions when viewed critically...or for that matter when viewed at all. Supposedly, he is using a feedback control system involving these neural cells to force some kind of output. I'd like to see that control scheme. Are the neurons part of the plant or part of the state estimator? Is he controlling rates, position, accelerations, or some combination therein? Are the state variables (velocity, acceleration, whatever) fed back into the neural network and compared against a predicted or commanded state? He is claiming to have developed a neuron based control system but there are absolutely no details about the control system itself so I am very wary of this claim.
So far as I know, the only thing a neuron, or batch of neurons, can do is process an electrical signal from one end to another. If that's the case I fail to see how these neurons are controlling anything. I don't see how they could be used to calculate or predict any state at all. If all they are doing is transferring the analog signal from a batch of sensors, and then delivering those signals to a microcontroller or something, then they are not controlling the system at all, they are simply acting as biological wires. If they are rerouting sensory signals to various parts of the circuit based on level of input, that would be something worth noting, but I am not sure how a batch of neurons could do that. Furthermore, Rodney Brookes was able to do pretty much the same thing with transistor sets and analog sensors years ago when he developed his robotic bug brain...so it's not like such a control scheme hasn't been cooked up before. It would be great to see the details of the work to know what Warwick is actually up to this time, but I have a sneaking suspicion that his neural controller is nothing more than a classic analog or digital controller that uses a batch of neurons to transfer signals in the exact same manner that wires or a transistor bank could do. I want details.
Motorcycles, Robots, Space Gossip and More!