A.C.COLLEGE OF ENGG. & TECH KARAIKUDI.

PAPER PRESENTATION ON ROBOTICS

PRESENTED BY, R.PREETHI RAJAIAH (II,ECE), S.SANGEETHA(II,ECE). Email:preethirajaiah@gmail.com

ABSTRACT: Having robots interact with each other and with humans requires some form of social intelligence, and there is still a lot to learn about this aspect by doing experiments and by studying aspects related to the intelligence of living organisms. This paper deals with the significance of robotics in toys and other areas and also with organic and humanoid robotics By using a combination of commercial off-the-shelf COTS) CAD/CAM simulation software and our own physical simulators constrained to correspond to real physical devices, we have been developing the technology for the coevolution of body and brains adaptive learning in body simulations, and the migration of brains from simpler to more complex simulated bodies until the virtual robot steps into reality using extensions of todays rapid prototyping technology. Finally, the robots brains must be robust enough to learn how to bridge the transition from virtual to actual reality Traditionally, engineers will build a complex robot , complete with powerful motors and sensors, and leave for the control programmers to write a program to make it run. But if we look into nature, we see animal brains of very high complexity, at least as complex as the bodies they inhabit,which have been precisely selected to be controllable. New sensor and effector technology for example, the micromotor, the optical position sensor, memory wire,FPGAs, biomimetic materials, biologically inspired retinas, and lately, MEMS, despite radical claims, cannot produce the desired breakthroughs. True robot success is task specific, not general purpose, and would be recognizable even if built of old electromechanical components. the complexity of the software design problem. Traditionally, engineers will build a complex robot , complete with powerful motors and sensors, and leave for the control programmers to write a program to make it run. But if we look into nature, we see animal brains of very high complexity, at least as complex as the bodies they inhabit, which have been precisely selected to be controllable.True robot success is task specific, not general purpose, and would be recognizable even if built of old electromechanical components.

ROBOT :
A robot is a machine that can be programmed to do a task. Once programmed it can repeat the task without further programmingand it can be programmed to do another task without redesigning the robot." INTRODUCTION : A research laboratory isworking on mobile robotics and intelligent systems to design intelligent systemsthat assist humans The research interest is primarily focussed on social robotics, i.e., robots interacting with each other and interacting with humans. topics related to social intelligence and robotics : are Designing robotic toys Using artificial emotions Localizing and identifying other robots, and communicating information using visual signs. MOBILE ROBOTIC TOYS : True robotic toy - One that can be programmed to do different things. There is usually an inexpensive robotic toy in a large toy store that can be programmed to move forward, reverse,turn and make sounds.Designing a mobile robotic toy to create interesting and Meaningful interactions

This experiment clearly showed that a mobile robot can help an autistic child to break out repetitive behavioral patterns and awareness of the outside world. Inconclusion, the field of mobile robotic toys for entertainment and pedagogical purposes Performance of the robots is based on their ability to entertain or educate.

INTERACTION USING VISUAL SIGNS : Social interaction in a heterogeneous group of robots and humans can be done in various ways: gesture, signs, speech, sounds, touch, etc. Communication is important In group robotics, this has been mostly done using IR, explicit radio communication of the positions of the robot obtained from a positioning system, and vision .Vision is the most interesting of these methods it is something that humans and animals have, as for an increasing number of robots. The problem for the robots is then to be able to visually identify, in real-time,other agents of various shapes, sizes, and types.One possible solution is to use visual cues.

In themedium-size RoboCup competition, colors are used to visually identify other agents To resolve these use of colored-light signaling device shown in Figure which allow implicit information concerning the context of their interaction communicate too if they have a signaling device at their disposal. which allows them to sense of they have a signaling device at their disposal. which allows them to sense or deduce implicitinformation concerning the context of their interaction robot equipped with the visual signaling device on the right, next to the camera The robot was also equipped with a touch screen for interaction with people.

WALKING HUMANIDS: In this paper we also introduce two humanoid robot prototypes We present two humanoid robots aimed as platforms for research in robotics, and cognitive development in robotics systems. They are 'priscilla' robot and elvis The underlying ideas and conceptual principles, such as anthropomor-phism, embodiment, and mechanisms for learning and adaptivity are introduced as well. PRISCILLA ROBOT : The 'priscilla' robot consists of a plastic skeleton with titanium reinforcements and linear electric actuators. Pricilla is a 180cm full scale humanoid, and the 70cm tall The skeleton design guarantees anthropomorphic geometry and enables close correspondence in movement capabilities. The goal is to make the robot strong and walk like human. Touch sensors guide the robot. The imminent goals are to walk upright and to navigate through vision serving a prototype for 'priscilla'.

(a) elvis robot

(b) priscilla robot

ELVIS ROBOT: The 'elvis' robot is autonomous with onboard power supply and main processing unit, however many experiments are mainly performed with connection to a host computer. The 'elvis' robot is a scale model of a full-size humanoid with a height of about 70cm, built with 42 standard servo motors giving a high degree of freedom in legs, arms and hands. Microphones, cameras

EXPERIMENTAL ENVIRONMENT : The environment is a miniature town covering an area of size 170cm x 120cm (figure 5). The robot is a modified RobotFootball robot3 with an 8cm x 8cm base (figure 6A). The robot carries a CCD colour TV camera4 (628 (H) x 582 (V) pixels) and a TV VHF transmitter. Images are processed by a PC that acquires them via with a TV capture card5 (an example of such image is shown in figure 6B). The PC then sends motion commands by FM radio to the robot. During corpus collection, the PC is also used to record instructions given by subjects.

Miniature robot (base 8cm x 8cm). B. View from the on-board colour camera The advantage of a miniature environment is the ability to build a complex route structure in the limited space of a laboratory. The design is as realistic as possible, to enable subjects to use expressions natural for the outdoor real-size environment. Buildings have signs taken from real life to indicate given shops or utilities such as the postoffice. However, the environment lacks some elements such as traffic lights that may normally be used in route instructions. Hence the collected corpus is likely to be more restricted than for outdoor route instructions.The advantage of using a robot with a remote-brain architecture [7] is that the robot does not require huge onboard computing and hence can be small, fitting the dimensions of the environment. Collection of a

corpus of route instructions is to collect linguistic and functional data specific to route learning, 24 subjects were recorded as they gave route instructions for the robot in the environment. Subjects were divided into three groups of 8. ROBOT ARCHITECTURE : The architecture is comprised of several functional processing modules . These are divided into two major units: the Dialogue Manager (DM) and the Robot Manager (RM).

robot architecture

The Dialogue Manager is a bi-directional interface between the Robot Manager and the user, either converting speech input into a DRS semantic representation , or converting requests from the Robot Manager into dialogues with the user. Its components are described .The RM deals with the DMs output and also with the learning and execution of the commands from the user. The RM includes two modules: the Process Manager (PM) and the Procedure Execution Module (PEM). The PEM is responsible for carrying out the commands by the user. It executes procedures called by the Process Manager module.The PM transforms the semantic representation produced by the DM into the internal language of the robot that includes learning and execution functions. Mapping symbols from the DRS onto the corresponding entities in the internal representation allows converting user requests into robot procedures with the right parameters.When successful, the PM starts the appropriate process either to execute the requested task by a call to the PEM or alternatively to build a new user-

defined procedure explained by the user. When such mapping is not successful the RM must inform the DM, which starts a clarification dialogue with the user.

Such mapping process is supported by a new specification language that expresses the relations between the symbols used in the DRS and the corresponding primitives. Thus to introduce new primitives, it is sufficient for the designer of an IBL systemto change the grammar of the specification language without having to recompile any of the RM modules. The Robot Manager is written using the Python2 scripting language. C language extensions to Python are also used in case where speed is a constraint (for example in vision routines). An important feature of scripting languages such as Python is their ability to write their own code. For instance, a route instruction given by the user will be saved by the Robot Manager as a Python script that then becomes part of the procedure set available to the robot for execution or future learning.It is important that the RM must listen to the DM and try to process its output but at the same time it should be able to send messages to the DM. The DM and the RM are designed as two different processes based on asynchronous communication protocols. These processes run concurrently on different processors. In this way,the system can handle, at the same time, both the dialogue aspects of an incoming request from the user (i.e.speech recognition and semantic analysis) and the execution of a previous user request (i.e. check if the request is in the system knowledge domain, and execute vision-based navigation procedures). Two aspects are essential with this concurrent-processes approach. The first is to define an appropriate communication protocol between the two processes. The second is to define an appropriate architecture for the RM and DM allowing the two processes to both communicate with each other while performing other tasks. At present the use of context-tagged messages within a communication based on the Open Agent Architecture (OAA) is evaluated. Moreover, the system must also dynamically adapt itself to new user requests or to new internal changes, by being able to temporarily suspend or permanently interrupt some previous activity. For example the user may want to prevent the robot crashing against a wall and must therefore be able to stop the robot while the robot is driving towards the wall. Hence, the importance of a concurrent approach where the system constantly listens to the user while performing other tasks and at the same time is able to adjust the task if necessary.

BUILDABLE SIMULATION : These COTS CAD models are in fact not constrained enough to be buildable, because they assume a human provides numerous reality constraints. In order to evolveboth the morphology and behavior of autonomous mechanical devices that can built, one must have a simulator that operates under many constraints, and a resultant controller that is adaptive enough to cover the gap between the simulated and real world. Features of a simulator for evolving morphology are: Universal - the simulator should cover an infinite general space of mechanisms. Conservative - because simulation is never margin . Efficient - it should be quicker to test in simulation than through physical production Buildable - results should be convertible from a simulation to a real object.One approach is to custom-build a simulator for modular robotic components, and then volve either centralized or distributed controllers for them. In advance of a modular simulator ith dynamics, we recently built a simulator for (static) lego bricks, and used very simple evolutionary algorithms to create complex lego structures ,which were then manually constructed perfect ,it should preserve safety

COTS CAD models for RNN controllers

The FAD Lego Crane(triangle)

The simulated universe is based on quasi-static motion,where dynamics are approximated as a series of frames,each in full static equilibrium. We have focused on this kind of motion as it is simple and fast to simulate.
EMBODIED EVOLUTION :

Once a robot is built, learning must proceed in the real world. Anticipating robots composed of many smaller and simpler robots, our work on evolution in real robotic has focused technologically on two of the main problems reprogramming and long-term power (Watson, Ficici, and Pollack, 1999). Many robots batteries last only for a few hours, and in order to change programs, they have to be attached to a PC and the new program has to be downloaded. In order to do large group robot learning experiments, we have designed a continuous power floor system, and the ability to transfer programs between robots via IR communications. We are thus able to run a population of learning robots battery-free and wire-free for days at a time

(a)

(b)

Simulated living truss robots: (a) hand designed, (b) random structure

The control architecture is a simple neural network and the specifications for it are evolved on-line. That is, each robot tries parameters for the network and evaluates its own success. The more successful a robot is at the task, the more frequently it will broadcast its network specifications via the local IR communications channel. If another robot happens to be in range of the broadcast, it

will adopt the broadcast value with a probability inversely related to its own success rate. Thus, successful robots attempt to influence others, and resist the influence of others, more frequently than less successful robots. REFERNCES : 1. Wol, K., and Nordin, P. (2001). Evolution of Efcient Gait with Humanoids using Visual Feedback. In Proceedings of the 2nd IEEE RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots, Humanoids 2001(pp.99-106). Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc. 2 Breazeal, C. 1998a. Infant-like social interactions between a robot and a human caretaker. Adaptive Behavior, special issue on Simulation Models of Social Agents. Breazeal, C. 1998b. A motivational system for regulating human-robot interaction. In Proceedings of AAAI.Cao, Y.U.,Fukunaga, A.S.Kahng, A. B. 1997. Cooperative mobile robotics: antecedents and directions. Autonomous Robots 4:123. Dautenhahn, K. 1999a. Robots as social actors: Aurora and the case of autism. In Proceedings of the International 3. Velasquez, J. D. 1998. A computational framework for emotion-based control. In Workshop on Grounding Emotions in Adaptive Systems, Conference on Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. Werry, I., and Dautenhahn, K. 1999. Applying robot technology to the rehabilitation of autistic children. In Proceedings International Symposium on Intelligent Robotic Systems. 4. 5. Chirikjian, G. S. (1994). Kinematics of a metamorphic robotic system, in IEEE Chocron O., Bidaud P. (1997). Genetic design of 3D modular manipulators, International Conference on Robotics and Automation. Proceedings of the 97 IEEE Int. Conf. on Robotics and Automation,Vol.1, pp.223-228.