6 ms·

It's a big company so it should be no surprise that some sections of Google are very excited about robotics. For example you may have seen https://www.youtube.c

It's a big company so it should be no surprise that some sections of Google are very excited about robotics. For example you may have seen https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaF43Ze1oeI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iaF43Ze1oeI which is research done by Levine et al at Google. One thing to notice in the video though is that those are all custom arms. Someone was able to get $1M+ to build out that lab and the work is on going. I think the thing that Google has recognized is that cutting edge robotics research that takes advantage of the work they have already done in deep learning doesn't require the kind of robots that Boston Dynamics (or many of the other companies they bought) build. Cutting edge robotics (from the perspective of learning systems) is back at the level of getting a single arm and a camera to learn basic tasks. In fact, there is a lot of research that can be done in simulation with these new deep methods that doesn't even require hardware. The software and learning systems they can develop will very likely make their way into super advanced complex hardware like Atlas in the future, but for now it's probably not the best use of their time.

joe_the_user 11y ago
Cutting edge robotics (from the perspective of learning systems) is back at the level of getting a single arm and a camera to learn basic tasks. Which is a nice way to say that robotics really hasn't progressed that much in a sense an outsider would see as progress (where progress on outsider-terms would be Boston-Dynamics style robots that can, say, learn task and repeat them), though I'm sure researchers can point to a lot of progress on their terms.
- sbierwagen 11y ago
  Which is a nice way to say that robotics really hasn't progressed that much in a sense an outsider would see as progress I work in mobile robotics, and I can tell you that there hasn't been a lot of progress. I wrote a post four years ago about all the various huge showstopping technical challenges facing mobile robots: http://c1qfxugcgy0.tumblr.com/post/31187427192/the-enduring-tragedy-of-the-robotics-industry-is http://c1qfxugcgy0.tumblr.com/post/31187427192/the-enduring-... Basically nothing has changed since then. To have a useful anthropomorphic robot you need better: batteries actuators software computers Only in software and computers are we seeing fast progress. (Big improvements in ConvNet algorithms, and the fast video cards you need to run them) But actuators need to be more powerful and much lighter, and batteries need to store at least ten times as much power. Progress in these fields has been slow, since energy storage is a mature field, and you don't see routine doubling of performance like you do with CPUs. And, of course, an economically useful anthropomorphic robot has to be dirt cheap, as well.
  - ant6n 11y ago
    I'm okay if my household robot is stuck in my household, and basically consists of very long arms.
  - skykooler 11y ago
    Batteries have changed a whole lot since the 90's, though. Lithium-ion has a much higher energy density than lead-acid or nickel-cadmium. And without these improvements, many modern robots (roombas, quadcopter drones, etc) would simply not be possible.
    - sbierwagen 11y ago
      Roombas run on NiMH batteries. The PR2 I discussed in the blog post does indeed have a lithium ion battery pack. It has a 1.3kWh capacity, (188 times bigger than an iPhone 6's battery! Probably part of the reason the robot massed 220 kilos) which gave it a rated... 2 hours of runtime. Lithium ion is better than earlier battery chemistries, but it's still not very good: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c6/Energy_density.svg/1080px-Energy_density.svg.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c6/En...
      - nobbis 11y ago
        450 lbs, not 480 kgs. The main power draw comes from the 2 desktop computers sitting in its base. Runs for ~4 hrs if you turn one off.
        sbierwagen 11y ago
        Fixed.
  - joe_the_user 11y ago
    And, of course, an economically useful anthropomorphic robot has to be dirt cheap, as well. Indeed, people talking about this subject often don't realize that humans are really cheap in many if not most circumstances (Boston Dynamics is working on poison-gas-protection-suit testing robot. Finally figured out a job a person wouldn't do). And it's an evil equation where once a given task is mastered by robots, it makes humans cheaper in many other tasks - because it increases the competition and because it decreases the cost of maintaining the human. So we've seen incremental automation and steadily declining living standards. Not a world that screams out the benefits of technology.
cptskippy 11y ago
When I was in school in the late 90s it seemed like all of the robotics and AI research were in create algorithms to emulate behavior. Boston Dynamic's work seems to be extended from that. They purpose built a robot with purpose built balancing and walking algorithms. The being pushed over and getting back up demonstration seemed to confirm that to me. Everything I'm seeing these days with AI research seems to be about developing systems that learn for themselves. Rather than telling the robot/AI exactly how to behave in a given situation, it's about allowing the robot/AI to experience as many situations as possible and learn what the appropriate response should be so that in the future it can independently identify and react accordingly.
- justinhj 11y ago
  I was also in AI school in the 90s and I agree with you to some extent. But when you think about nature, much of the behaviour of animals is not cognitive, but instinctive and physically dependent on their structure. In other words if you can build a robot that knows how to walk because you built it that way, why not do so and build more interesting learning at the decision making level?
  - seivan 11y ago
    A self writing behavior tree that uses behavior to write new behavior based on past behaviors. Sounds human enough to become an addict of some sorts. :-).
  - cptskippy 11y ago
    Well the problem with that approach is that you have to account for every possible situation that might occur and program them into the robot. When a situation arises that you didn't anticipate then bad things happen. When a learning machine, it can teach itself, adapt and understand. The former approach works fine for a factory floor robot that is in a controlled environment but doesn't lend itself well to other situations. An example might be a biped robot walking up a mountain and it falls. Most of the examples I've seen, the Boston Dynamics one included, have the robot detect it's falling and put itself into a crash position where it remains until it comes to a rest before attempting to recover. If your robot is rolling down a mountain it might be destroyed before it comes to a rest. Having a feedback loop, reflex reactions and the ability to access the situation and recover dynamically would be much more useful.

joe_the_user 11y ago

Cutting edge robotics (from the perspective of learning systems) is back at the level of getting a single arm and a camera to learn basic tasks. Which is a nice way to say that robotics really hasn't progressed that much in a sense an outsider would see as progress (where progress on outsider-terms would be Boston-Dynamics style robots that can, say, learn task and repeat them), though I'm sure researchers can point to a lot of progress on their terms.

sbierwagen 11y ago
Which is a nice way to say that robotics really hasn't progressed that much in a sense an outsider would see as progress I work in mobile robotics, and I can tell you that there hasn't been a lot of progress. I wrote a post four years ago about all the various huge showstopping technical challenges facing mobile robots: http://c1qfxugcgy0.tumblr.com/post/31187427192/the-enduring-tragedy-of-the-robotics-industry-is http://c1qfxugcgy0.tumblr.com/post/31187427192/the-enduring-... Basically nothing has changed since then. To have a useful anthropomorphic robot you need better: batteries actuators software computers Only in software and computers are we seeing fast progress. (Big improvements in ConvNet algorithms, and the fast video cards you need to run them) But actuators need to be more powerful and much lighter, and batteries need to store at least ten times as much power. Progress in these fields has been slow, since energy storage is a mature field, and you don't see routine doubling of performance like you do with CPUs. And, of course, an economically useful anthropomorphic robot has to be dirt cheap, as well.
- ant6n 11y ago
  I'm okay if my household robot is stuck in my household, and basically consists of very long arms.
- skykooler 11y ago
  Batteries have changed a whole lot since the 90's, though. Lithium-ion has a much higher energy density than lead-acid or nickel-cadmium. And without these improvements, many modern robots (roombas, quadcopter drones, etc) would simply not be possible.
  - sbierwagen 11y ago
    Roombas run on NiMH batteries. The PR2 I discussed in the blog post does indeed have a lithium ion battery pack. It has a 1.3kWh capacity, (188 times bigger than an iPhone 6's battery! Probably part of the reason the robot massed 220 kilos) which gave it a rated... 2 hours of runtime. Lithium ion is better than earlier battery chemistries, but it's still not very good: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c6/Energy_density.svg/1080px-Energy_density.svg.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c6/En...
    - nobbis 11y ago
      450 lbs, not 480 kgs. The main power draw comes from the 2 desktop computers sitting in its base. Runs for ~4 hrs if you turn one off.
      - sbierwagen 11y ago
        Fixed.
- joe_the_user 11y ago
  And, of course, an economically useful anthropomorphic robot has to be dirt cheap, as well. Indeed, people talking about this subject often don't realize that humans are really cheap in many if not most circumstances (Boston Dynamics is working on poison-gas-protection-suit testing robot. Finally figured out a job a person wouldn't do). And it's an evil equation where once a given task is mastered by robots, it makes humans cheaper in many other tasks - because it increases the competition and because it decreases the cost of maintaining the human. So we've seen incremental automation and steadily declining living standards. Not a world that screams out the benefits of technology.

cptskippy 11y ago

When I was in school in the late 90s it seemed like all of the robotics and AI research were in create algorithms to emulate behavior. Boston Dynamic's work seems to be extended from that. They purpose built a robot with purpose built balancing and walking algorithms. The being pushed over and getting back up demonstration seemed to confirm that to me. Everything I'm seeing these days with AI research seems to be about developing systems that learn for themselves. Rather than telling the robot/AI exactly how to behave in a given situation, it's about allowing the robot/AI to experience as many situations as possible and learn what the appropriate response should be so that in the future it can independently identify and react accordingly.

justinhj 11y ago
I was also in AI school in the 90s and I agree with you to some extent. But when you think about nature, much of the behaviour of animals is not cognitive, but instinctive and physically dependent on their structure. In other words if you can build a robot that knows how to walk because you built it that way, why not do so and build more interesting learning at the decision making level?
- seivan 11y ago
  A self writing behavior tree that uses behavior to write new behavior based on past behaviors. Sounds human enough to become an addict of some sorts. :-).
- cptskippy 11y ago
  Well the problem with that approach is that you have to account for every possible situation that might occur and program them into the robot. When a situation arises that you didn't anticipate then bad things happen. When a learning machine, it can teach itself, adapt and understand. The former approach works fine for a factory floor robot that is in a controlled environment but doesn't lend itself well to other situations. An example might be a biped robot walking up a mountain and it falls. Most of the examples I've seen, the Boston Dynamics one included, have the robot detect it's falling and put itself into a crash position where it remains until it comes to a rest before attempting to recover. If your robot is rolling down a mountain it might be destroyed before it comes to a rest. Having a feedback loop, reflex reactions and the ability to access the situation and recover dynamically would be much more useful.