Slashdot Mirror


Harvard Licenses Technology For Tiny Swarming Robot

Zothecula writes "Do you think that you'll never be able to afford a robot of your own that isn't a toy? Well, if you can get Swiss robot-maker K-Team Corporation to sell you one, chances are you can easily afford a Kilobot — perhaps even a whole bunch of them. Designed and first built by Harvard University's Self-Organizing Systems Research Group, the three-legged robots aren't much larger than the 3.4-volt button cell batteries that power them, and move by vibrating across smooth, flat surfaces. They were created to study robotic swarming behavior, with the intention that tens, hundreds or even thousands of them could be used simultaneously in one experiment. Harvard has just announced that it has licensed the Kilobot technology to K-Team, which will commercially manufacture the robots so that other groups and institutions can purchase them for their own research."

38 comments

  1. Then, let's teach them... by Jawnn · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...to build copies of themselves. What could possibly go wrong?

    1. Re:Then, let's teach them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No problem, they're designed from the ground up to be three laws safe.

    2. Re:Then, let's teach them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Big Brother Is Watching You.

    3. Re:Then, let's teach them... by Trubadidudei · · Score: 5, Funny

      They're already one letter away from being killbots. Mark my words, soon they will travel around in packs and vibrate people to death.

    4. Re:Then, let's teach them... by icemanwol · · Score: 2

      So would that make them "Replicators"? I had better go get Amanda Tapping so she can save us all!

    5. Re:Then, let's teach them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now someone should post the xkcd about that and get +5 funny.

    6. Re:Then, let's teach them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My wife will love those.

    7. Re:Then, let's teach them... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know we're supposed to hate Michael Crichton because of State of Fear, but am I the only one who read Prey?

    8. Re:Then, let's teach them... by Ginger+Unicorn · · Score: 1
      --
      (1.21 gigawatts) / (88 miles per hour) = 30 757 874 newtons
  2. Is this a first post I see before me?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I, for one, think many women may welcome our new robotic, swarming, vibrating, overlords...

  3. Reliability by Hentes · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Moving using vibration could be hard on those tiny legs. What is the lifetime if these things?

  4. Oh, great... by sconeu · · Score: 2, Funny

    Just what we need... Killbots.

    --
    General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
    1. Re:Oh, great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Costello : Finally, a KillAbott.

    2. Re:Oh, great... by sesshomaru · · Score: 1

      "Ladies and gentlemen, my Killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."

      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    3. Re:Oh, great... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If its anything like my Lotus Notes then we are completely safe. It will vibrate...crash....vibrate....crash

    4. Re:Oh, great... by Dexter+Herbivore · · Score: 1

      That joke is going to miss most of /. I'll just pre-emptively 'whoosh' for anyone else who posts in reply.

    5. Re:Oh, great... by Cinnamon+Whirl · · Score: 2

      Not a problem, we can outsmart them:
      "Killbots have a pre-set kill-limit. Knowing their weakness, I sent wave after wave of my own men at them, 'till they reached their limit and shut down"

    6. Re:Oh, great... by quietlikeachurch · · Score: 1

      Hey! Not all of us are uncultured hooligans...

      --
      "One day you will be able to hurt your smart phone's feelings." - Mahhshall
    7. Re:Oh, great... by jamiesan · · Score: 1

      So I throw the ball to Kilobot.

      No! Who!

      I don't know!

      THIRD BASE!

  5. Can build yourself... by HizookRobotics · · Score: 3, Informative

    There's a long history of home-made steerable vibrobots. You can probably make one of these from parts readily available in your junkbox.

    A quick tangent: I've seen these in person. They're pretty cool, but I'm not sure what "technology" Harvard is licensing. Perhaps just the PCB design and code?

    1. Re:Can build yourself... by Hentes · · Score: 2

      It's not just the motion but also the communication using reflected lights.

    2. Re:Can build yourself... by HizookRobotics · · Score: 1

      I understand that they can communicate using reflective infrared light. My TV remote can do the same thing to reach a non-line of sight receiver. I believe they also use the reflected IR light for rudimentary distance sensing -- much like the Sharp IR sensor modules. What I'm trying to say: the hardware aspects of this project are fairly well-established -- as far as I can tell, there are no new "hardware" technologies (but I am a fan of readily-available low-cost robots). The Harvard group's big contribution (re:research) is in swarm algorithms.

    3. Re:Can build yourself... by mako1138 · · Score: 1

      Well, the things are ~$1200 for 10, so someone's making money, I bet.

  6. I want one by Mister+Liberty · · Score: 1

    The coin! Looks foreign to me. If that's a robot the coin must be a huge. I want one.
    Hope they ship to The Netherlands!

    1. Re:I want one by Spugglefink · · Score: 1

      The coin! Looks foreign to me.

      That's a US quarter dollar coin. Wikipedia says they're 24.26 mm in diameter. FYI.

  7. Why is academia permitted to sell their discoverie by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 3, Insightful

    -s?

    Isn't the whole point of academic research the free and open sharing of knowledge? But universities obtain patents then sell exclusive licenses to them, despite the research generally being done at taxpayer expense.

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
  8. Misleading Summary by Smurf · · Score: 2

    TFS says:

    Do you think that you'll never be able to afford a robot of your own that isn't a toy? Well, if you can get [...]

    Cool. Clearly these "three-legged robots (that) aren't much larger than the 3.4-volt button cell batteries that power them, and move by vibrating across smooth, flat surfaces" are very useful if you are "studying robotic swarming behavior" and I bet people can come with several other fields where these mini-robots could be of practical use.

    But then, most of us would be able to come up with several experiments which would make practical use of any of the many robots that are currently sold as toys. And some of those experiments would without any doubt be commendable research projects.

    Unfortunately most of us do not work in those areas of research where the Kilobots (or any other commercially available, reasonably priced robot) are applicable. For 99.9% of the people, Kilobots are nothing more than FREAKING TOYS!!

  9. I, for one... by heretic108 · · Score: 1

    (/me ducks)

    --
    -- In the beginning was the WORD, and the WORD was UNSIGNED, and the main(){} was without form and void...
  10. Re:Why is academia permitted to sell their discove by Missing.Matter · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here is the IP policiy of the NSF: http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/manuals/gpm05_131/gpm7.jsp#730

    This project in particular was funded by the NSF and the Wyss Institute, which looks like some sort of incubator funded by Harvard. The gist of the NSF policty is that the grantee retains all rights to the invention/patents/copyrights of the research. This makes sense given the NSF's mission statement: "To promote the progress of science; to advance the national health, prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense...."

  11. Favoritism is shown in licensing ... by perpenso · · Score: 2

    Isn't the whole point of academic research the free and open sharing of knowledge? But universities obtain patents then sell exclusive licenses to them, despite the research generally being done at taxpayer expense.

    The licensing can be done is a way that favors the taxpayers as well. For example the University of California is quite aggressive about patenting discoveries and licensing the patents. The terms of the licensing is far more favorable if you are a startup or small rather than a large established corporation, if you are local, etc. I'm not sure but there may also be consideration for companies that support research at the university or employ its students.

    Half the fees collected go to the UC system in general and one quarter to the department that made the discovery. The remaining quarter to the researchers who made the discovery.

  12. And for what purpose? by HalAtWork · · Score: 2

    Why use these when you can just simulate them? Designing/training the AI would much more interesting than seeing if it can be carried out by this particular design.

    1. Re:And for what purpose? by Hentes · · Score: 1

      I guess they do use simulations to refine the original design as it's way faster, but eventually every algorithm has to be tested IRL. Simulations are imperfect.

  13. Futurama Reference by notcreative · · Score: 1

    Oh well, we can always build more Kilobots

  14. Tiny swarming robots by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    WILL KILL US ALL!!!

  15. Re:Why is academia permitted to sell their discove by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Its the monopoly empire that makes the 1% .. and its the monopoly empire that deny the 99%..

  16. Re:Why is academia permitted to sell their discove by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The robot design is also open source under a creative commons license that lets you make your own ...