Automaton

Brown professor Odest Chadwicke Jenkins and his students have invented a new game: RoombaTag. Here's a first-hand account:

We have currently implemented a robot game server and clients for playing the example game of "RoombaTag." RoombaTag follows the basic format of most first-person tag games, where each player's objective is to "tag'' other robots more than they get tagged. Each player controls a single robot given a video feed from their robot's perspective. A successful tag results in scoring a point for the tagger and a momentary freezing of the controls of the tagged robot.

RoombaTag uses our robotic platform, named "SmURV'' (Small Universal Robot Vehicle) in an iRobot Create with a Mini-ITX form factor computer. The Smurv also has a Unibrain Fire-I camera as a visual sensor and an IR emitter attached to the Create functioning as an "IR cannon.'' The ITX machine runs Linux (SLAS distribution) and Player/Stage robot server from a flash memory card, allowing both control of the robot hardware via TCP/IP over wireless and execution of onboard robot controllers.

Game state shared between multiple Smurvs are implemented in a game server. The game server that acts as a mediator, a referee and a switchboard between the set of physical robots and the users controlling the robots through the internet. Users control a robot through a client-side Java application that communicates with the game server.

The Smurv bots are currently controlled using keyboards, but the Brown group plans to replace them with Wii-mote controllers.

To learn more, check out their Robot Learning through Embodied Gaming page.

On July 26th, the MIT Museum here in Cambridge, Mass was full of some of the best and brightest roboticists in the area. The Boston chapter of TiE partnered with Robotics Trends to bring together experts to talk about the robotics industry and where it was headed.

Neena Buck, an industry analyst at MIT, and Dan Kara, president of Robotics Trends, introduced the robotics industry to the audience of mostly software entrepreneurs. Helen Greiner, co-founder and chairman of iRobot, gave a keynote about her company and the lessons learned over the last fifteen years. Finally, a panel spent some time answering questions from moderator Dan Kara and the audience. The panel was comprised of a Media Lab PhD candidate named Cory Kidd, also the founder of company Intuitive Automata; Joe Jones, CTO and Co-Founder of Q Robotics and also one of the inventors of the Roomba; Rory MacKean, R&D Manager at Mobile Robots (formerly ActivMedia); and Chris Wallsmith, CKO at Bluefin Robotics (he also has the dubious honor of being my boss).

The panel was fascinating, not just in terms of the answers they gave to the questions, but also to see what sorts of questions were asked by the not-necessarily-roboticist audience. A few interesting points and observations:

• Asia vs the US: there's a well known split in the attitudes toward robots in the US versus in Japan and South Korea. In Asia, it goes, robots are often humanoid (or canine-oid, in the case of Aibo), are meant to interact directly with people, and are thought of --and designed to be -- as pets or companions. In the US, robots are for "dull/dirty/dangerous" tasks like manufacturing or defense and are generally thought of as tools. This may be changing in the US, though. Helen Greiner had stories of Roomba customers asking for *their* Roomba to be repaired, not a replacement unit. Military PackBot operators give awards to the robots as though they are part of the human team and, like the Roomba owners, want their own robot repaired, not to have a new one sent to them. It will be interesting to see how these attitudes drive designs of the next generation of US robots, and whether the US and Asia begin to converge on their designs.
• The "killer app": there were many questions from the audience about what the panelists thought the "killer app" was for the robotics industry -- not a surprising question from those who work in software. What was surprising was the panel's almost unanimous response: there is none, because robots will literally be everywhere. Chris Wallsmith pointed out that robots are much like computers; that is, computers are everywhere -- your laptop, your cell phone, your car, your calculator -- but people don't call them computers. Similarly, he said, your car will be robotic, your kitchen will be robotic, your personal fitness trainer will be robotic... but they'll be called cars, kitchens, and trainers. Not robots.
• Training for robotics: a hypothetical investor in the audience asked what one should look for in evaluating the experience of people proposing a new robotic technology to VCs. The panelists all had different answers -- a background in psychology may help with the design of interfaces and interactions; a broad engineering base is needed to build up the electrical, mechanical, and software systems of a robot; membership in the target customer base lends credibility to the design. The only agreement seemed to be that a broadly experienced group is necessary for success.

So where is the industry headed? Everywhere, it seems. The good news is that not a single person in the room seemed at all pessimistic about the robotics industry; there's funding for startups, a healthy US defense research funding source, rapid growth of new technologies and new ways for people to interact with machines, and growing acceptance of robots working for and with humans. It's an exciting time.

Check this out -- Kiva Systems' robots in action in a Staples warehouse. I've seen one of these up close before (carrying a person, actually)... it's pretty neat. The bearings used to keep the payload in the same orientation must be pretty crazy. When I saw one in action, it used little bar-code type labels to follow on the floor, but there's some net intelligence directing them because these guys are all moving in an overall organized fashion -- this article from the video producer, Fast Company, suggests that "blinking blue lights" help coordinate them somehow. At some point in the future we'll talk with the creators and see what we can find out!

Video by Fast Company

Hexapod robots have long fascinated roboticists, and now you can find the six-legged creatures swimming in the Caribbean or harvesting timber in Finland. There's also a legion of do-it-yourselfers creating their own hexapods just because it's fun.

One of them is J. de Vries, a 42-year-old webdesigner from Neustrelitz, Germany. When he's not taking care of his daughters (15-month twins), de Vries works on Marvin, the hexapod in the image below.

Marvin uses nine Atmel microcontrollers (ATmega16, 32, and 64) and 20 servomotors. It's only 30 to 40 percent finished, de Vries says, adding that he plans to include some onboard sensors after perfecting Marvin's locomotion.

"I don't have any degree in engineering and I never saw an university from inside," de Vries says. "But since I was 12 years old, my dream was to build a robot. ... Last year I learned a lot about microcontrollers, servomotors and the required electronics while building a quadcopter with brushless motors. And that was the beginning of realizing my old robot dream."

De Vries has a web page with videos, images, and technical details on Marvin (in German).

A report from our correspondent Sally Adee, who earlier this month was at DARPATech, the Pentagon's R&D extravaganza, where she met, among other creatures, a little robotic dog called, well, Little Dog:

This little guy was all the rage at the DARPATech 2007 exhibit hall.

“Can I pet him?” a girl asked the researchers standing next to it. “No,” they told her. “Can I have him?” she insisted. “No, sorry." She thought about it for a minute. “Can I talk to him?” she finally asked. “Well, you could,” the researchers said testily, “but it can't hear you.”

If you’re wondering why the researchers appeared so cranky, it was probably because visitor after visitor, fascinated by the little critter’s attempts to negotiate its obstacle course, only wanted to know how the robot was built, how many actuators it had, what sensors and battery it carried. The perpetually exasperated response: "It’s not about the robot! The important thing here is the software."

Little Dog, developed by Boston Dynamics, is part of DARPA's Learning Locomotion program. DARPA selected six teams, each of which received one Little Dog unit. The teams will have to write locomotion software to make the robot traverse an irregular surface with various obstacles.

Alas, it’s a lot harder to get excited about abstract software. The researchers repeatedly tried to redirect our attention to the big screens above Little Dog showing essentially what was going on in his head. The cameras above the display mapped out the terrain in detail and sent a path to the machine’s processor.

This particular version of Little Dog meticulously plans its every move before it takes its first step. It was a peculiar sight: Little Dog standing transfixed at the start of its obstacle course, staring intently at the road ahead, as the screens flashed and changed and check marks were applied to tasks. It's not everyday you can peek into a dog's brain.

And then Little Dog begins to move. One leg tentatively snakes forward and gingerly tests the ground in front of it before the machine puts its full weight on the foot. This software has a lot to keep track of: it has to distribute the machine’s weight properly to keep Little Dog from losing its balance, all the while locating itself within its physical surroundings. Not all Little Dogs will navigate the obstacle course the same way. UPenn’s Little Dog, for instance, has a different locomotion software than MIT’s Little Dog.

Despite its name, Little Dog's shape was a matter of debate -- a Rorschach test of sorts. When observers compared his movements to those of a cat, cat people immediately came out of the woodwork to point out that his movements much more accurately resembled those of a roach. “His legs aren’t articulated at all like a cat’s,” said Spectrum senior editor Jean Kumagai, herself a cat person.

But everyone agreed that the least of all resembled a dog. At which point the beleaguered researchers would again try to steer the conversation back to the abstract code powering the machine.

* Transformer Optimus Prime prevented a burglary in the U.K. This transformer is made of wood and stands 7 feet tall in the living room of one Michael Clarke, in Gravesend, Kent. The robot has motion sensors that activate a stereo, piercing purple eyes, and it matches the owner's couch.

* More robots from iRobot. The Roomba maker says it is mutating. The company wants to keep expanding its product line. Three years ago, it had only one domestic robot, the Roomba; by the end of this year it wants to have six domestic robots in the market. I wonder if Masseur Bot is on that list.

* Peter Crouch, the elongated (2 meters/6 feet 7 inches) British soccer player who celebrated some of his goals with an ridiculous robot dance, said the moves were because he's been "messing about" with robotics since he was a child. He also said no more robotic celebrations this season. That's a good thing.

Having attended a wonderful wine tasting last night at a former professor's house, I've been feeling particularly oenophilic. During the tasting the professor told us about a lot of the technology vineyard owners have started using to track their crops. Since vines produce different fruit depending on shade, temperature, amount of water, type of soil, and so on, a good vineyard owner needs to know all about the different conditions all over his or her vineyard -- and small, cheap sensor technology only makes that easier. This of course led me to the natural conclusion: my wine could only be better if a robot is involved!

So what can robots do for a wine geek like me? I could purchase my very own "Robo-sommelier" to see if I'm actually getting what I'm buying -- using infrared light, it can tell what the type of the wine is without even opening it -- or it could learn my tastes and be able to recommend a wine to pair with my dinner.

Before the wine gets to my table, a vineyard owner might use an automated tractor to care for the vines. It can navigate using the wires that the vines grow on and can tow a sprayer or other equipment, preventing a human from having to do the long, dull task of driving the tractor through a huge vineyard. A 5-DOF robotic hand combined with a vision system might be doing some of the harvesting or care for the bunches of grapes on the vine. A friend at the wine tasting with me mentioned having seen one vineyard in which a robotic system rotated and tipped bottles slightly each day as they aged.

The agriculture industry is really embracing robotics and automation (Rocona is one example; John Deere and others are following suit), but it will be interesting to see if the wine industry actually adopts the technologies being created for them. Vineyard owners pride themselves on understanding their crops and how climate conditions will affect their output; sommeliers and wine aficionados are proud of their tasting abilities and standards. Will these people really want to hand over their art to machines?

I thought this was pretty hilarious -- and devoted readers may recognize Leonardo from an earlier post!

Click To Play

iRobot just released their new line of Roombas today. They look awesome -- a lot more like the space-age robots I expect to have in my home. It looks from the new specs that they've added some great new features, too, like onboard scheduling and voice interaction.

The National Underwater Robotics Challenge [warning: frames, marquees, and other non-standard HTML abound], sponsored by Honeywell Hometown Solutions, is held yearly at Chandler High School in Arizona. Teams of students of almost any age can work together to build a remotely operated vehicle capable of performing some sort of underwater mission -- the 2008 competition (to be held next June) requires the ROVs to work around a crashed plane carrying vials of an important medicine and perform a number of tasks.

In addition to a neat "how-to" page full of cheap ways to design and build subsystems for the ROVs, the organization now sells a complete ROV kit of parts, complete with instruction manual, for $250. Even if you're not part of the competition, this would be a neat thing to explore a backyard swimming pool or lake!

Check out some of the videos of the missions to see what the students have done.

One of my coworkers, Mike Cimpher, built this little biped in 2001. He says it consists of "12 servos, 2 ICs and an accelerometer." Being an artist as well, his video does a really neat job of showing the transition of development -- from something that falls apart all the way to something that stands up and walks.

My company is pretty firmly entrenched in the defense industry. In fact, many robotics companies are -- defense contracting is a good way to pay the bills while growing other areas of research and development. But while robots are really amazing things to work on in and of themselves, the technology is slowly advancing toward greater capability and autonomy -- and for those of us working defense contracts, this has some uncomfortable implications.

Bluefin's AUVs aren't weapons (when people I ask, I remind them that there is already a word for an autonomous submarine that explodes -- "torpedo") and most other companies aren't actively weaponizing their robots. To date the bulk of military robotics has been oriented toward surveillance, security, and disposal of mines and IEDs -- situations where most everyone can agree that it's a good idea to keep a human out of the way.

But things are changing. Even if companies aren't putting on guns, they're at least putting on gun mounts. Early last month Wired reported on the newly weaponized ground robots. Other companies are building in weapons payload options: recently a Reaper aerial drone made history as the first Army unmanned military vehicle to kill (thank you for the correction, Kevin); its remote operators used it to locate two men suspected of placing an IED and dropped its "precision munitions" on the targets.

What do the users of these robots think? At the OceanTech Expo in early September, I attended an AUV panel; one of the panelists, Bill Schopfel, is the event manager at the Office of Naval Research. He spoke specifically to the role of robotic vehicles in underwater mine countermeasures -- he says for the forseeable future, the decision to engage and neutralize mines will not be autonomous; even if the vehicle is capable of performing neutralization measures, there will still be a person in the loop who is making the decision to engage. With respect to autonomous vehicles that operate without a human's control, a DoD proposal from last year discusses the idea that humans target humans and machines target machines -- though that proposal has not yet passed legal review.

The Army's Future Combat Systems initiative is becoming a reality, but it really demands thought and careful consideration of the ways we're deciding to employ technology -- though our military needs demand immediate technological solutions. How can we make sure ethics and technology develop at the same pace?

And speaking of robots on the battlefield, Wired's Danger Room points to a Defense News story about a U.S. Army $280 million contract to buy 3000 Negotiator robots from Robotic FX. The Negotiator tactical robot [photo above] is a "45-pound bomb detector with infrared cameras used by hundreds of state, local and federal law enforcement agencies around the U.S.," Defense News reports, adding that an "initial delivery order will be for 101 Robotic FX Negotiators, marking their first use with the U.S. military on the battlefield," where they will be used to clear caves and search for explosives.

I've had it in my mind for some time that my grandparents could really benefit from a robotic companion -- someone to let them know when one of the grandkids has emailed, to remind them to take their meds (even to go get the pills for them), to keep an eye on their health and safety, and so on. And I knew Japan, among other Asian countries, has really been at the forefront of this research.

But I wasn't expecting to learn today that robots seem to be less exciting to the elderly than expected. Apparently, the Ifbot in question spent a month entertaining the residents of a nursing home before they got bored with it. What has been successful, however, are lower-tech products like the i-pot send an update to family every time someone makes tea with it, to show that Grandma or Grandpa is up and around. Really interesting reading for anyone considering the elder care market.

Thanks for the tip, Gui!

iRobot announced two new products today, adding to their already pioneering line of home robots.

First up is the Looj, a gutter-cleaning bot. It's remote-controlled; that is, a user puts it up in a gutter, steps down the ladder, and from there directs its movement along a gutter, moving both forward and backward. From the website:

iRobot Looj uses a powerful 3-stage auger, spinning at 500 RPM, to break up sludge and clogs, lift out debris and brush your gutters clean. The hard plastic disruptors break apart clogs, while natural rubber ejectors lift and throw the debris from your gutters, finally, sturdy polypropylene bristles brush your gutters clean.

Gutter cleaners are all well and good, but I am REALLY excited about this next one: ConnectR, the Virtual Visiting robot. Thus spake iRobot:

ConnectR enables real-time virtual visits over the Internet. Equipped with high-quality audio and a video camera, the robot is located on-site in the home of the “host” party. Using a computer keyboard, mouse or joystick, the remote (“visiting”) party can drive the robot around and interact with those on-site, virtually participating in activities at home or wherever the device is located (for example, in the home of your grandchildren). The on-site host party can also direct the robot’s movements with a remote control.

The Looj is available now, but ConnectR isn't out yet -- and robot aficionados have the opportunity to be part of a pilot program this year. They'll choose pilot users from a pool of applicants here -- sign up!

Looj currently sells from $99 to $169, depending on th