Skip to main content

Dario Floreano and Nicola Nosengo - Five Way Interview

Dario Floreano is Director of the Laboratory of Intelligent Systems at the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne (EPFL). He is the coauthor of Evolutionary Robotics and Bio-Inspired Artificial Intelligence (both published by the MIT Press). Nicola Nosengo is a science writer and science communicator at EPFL. His work has appeared in Nature, the Economist, Wired, and other publications, and he is the Chief Editor of Nature Italy. Their recent book is Tales from a Robotic World.

Why robotics?

Robotics is where Artificial Intelligence becomes tangible and personal. You may forget about the AI that powers your online searches, but it is hard to ignore the physical presence and motion of robots next to you. Robots have transformed factories, they are widely used in warehouses, hospitals, even homes - at least in the form of vacuum cleaners. Drones are becoming ubiquitous. And yet there is so much more that robots could do for us, and so many more places where they could prove useful, if they were more autonomous and capable of learning from their experiences and from us, if they could understanding the meaning of what they see and what they hear, if their mechanical bodies could be more adaptable and life-like. Thanks to the convergence of engineering, neuroscience, materials science, robotics is now entering a new phase, and that makes it one of the most exciting fields of science now.

Why this book?

Surprisingly, physical robots are largely neglected in the media and in books. Often, when people talk or write about "robots" nowadays they really talk of software-based AI, algorithms and data. Indeed, AI has had amazing successes lately, and it tends to overshadow physical robotics, which may seem to lag behind. In fact, making robots intelligent is harder than making intelligent data-crunching algorithms, but there are many recent advances that will make robots more capable and pervasive in the near future, and that deserve to be known by the public. With this book, we wanted to fill this gap and to show where robotics research is now. But we also understand that people want to know how all of that research will make a difference in their lives, which is why we stuck our neck out and described concrete future scenarios made possible by current-day research.

Despite all the promises, robots (and even driverless cars, particularly on winding European roads) always seem to be behind promised timescales. Why do we underestimate how long it takes for these technologies to mature?

Part of the reason is that, when it comes to predicting the pace of technological progress, we have been spoiled by what happened in computation, where computing power has grown exponentially according to what is usually called Moore's law, and the performances of all machines that rely on microchip have grown as a consequence. Many people have made the mistake of thinking that progress in robotics is a matter of increasing computing power, as it is the case with computing. But technologies that work with the physical world are more complicated than those that work with data - and that includes driverless cars, that are in effect robots that have to move in unpredictable environments and among people. They require not just improvements in algorithms and computing chips, but also in material science, mechanical engineering, sensor development, social interaction, cognitive science, and much more. Creating a new generation of robots requires new design and control principles, and a much closer collaboration with biologists, neuroscientists, and psychologists than in classical engineering or computer science. 

What’s next?

It would be fun and instructive to turn the book into a documentary series or a movie. Robots deserve to be seen live!

What’s exciting you at the moment?

N. I don't know if 'exciting' is the right word, but the conversion of our economy away from fossil fuels and towards renewable energy is definitely the defining challenge of our era, one that will require a lot of new research combined with a lot of social innovation. It will be exciting to watch it happen over the next couple of decades, hoping that there is enough political will for it. By the way, robotics will have to be part of this transformation. We can't flood the world with yet more machines and make them energy-hungry, or harmful for the environment. The robots of the future will have to be sustainable, or they won't be at all.   

D. My research projects include edible robots and robotic food; bird-inspired robots capable of moving in the air, ground, forests, and water; human augmentation by robotic swarms, and evolutionary robots.

Interview by Brian Clegg - See all of Brian's online articles or subscribe to a digest free here

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Laws of Thought - Tom Griffiths *****

In giving us a history of attempts to explain our thinking abilities, Tom Griffiths demonstrates an excellent ability to pitch information just right for the informed general reader.  We begin with Aristotelian logic and the way Boole and others transformed it into a kind of arithmetic before a first introduction of computing and theories of language. Griffiths covers a surprising amount of ground - we don't just get, for instance, the obvious figures of Turing, von Neumann and Shannon, but the interaction between the computing pioneers and those concerned with trying to understand the way we think - for example in the work of Jerome Bruner, of whom I confess I'd never heard.  This would prove to be the case with a whole host of people who have made interesting contributions to the understanding of human thought processes. Sometimes their theories were contradictory - this isn't an easy field to successfully observe - but always they were interesting. But for me, at least, ...
Post a Comment
Read more

The AI Paradox - Virginia Dignum ****

This is a really important book in the way that Virginia Dignum highlights various ways we can misunderstand AI and its abilities using a series of paradoxes. However, I need to say up front that I'm giving it four stars for the ideas: unfortunately the writing is not great. It reads more like a government report than anything vaguely readable - it really should have co-authored with a professional writer to make it accessible. Even so, I'm recommending it: like some government reports it's significant enough to make it necessary to wade through the bureaucrat speak. Why paradoxes? Dignum identifies two ways we can think about paradoxes (oddly I wrote about paradoxes recently , but with three definitions): a logical paradox such as 'this statement is false', or a paradoxical truth such as 'less is more' - the second of which seems a better to fit to the use here.  We are then presented with eight paradoxes, each of which gives some insights into aspects of t...
Post a Comment
Read more

Einstein's Fridge - Paul Sen ****

In Einstein's Fridge (interesting factoid: this is at least the third popular science book to be named after Einstein's not particularly exciting refrigerator), Paul Sen has taken on a scary challenge. As Jim Al-Khalili made clear in his excellent The World According to Physics , our physical understanding of reality rests on three pillars: relativity, quantum theory and thermodynamics. But there is no doubt that the third of these, the topic of Sen's book, is a hard sell. While it's true that these are the three pillars of physics, from the point of view of making interesting popular science, the first two might be considered pillars of gold and platinum, while the third is a pillar of salt. Relativity and quantum theory are very much of the twentieth century. They are exciting and sometimes downright weird and wonderful. Thermodynamics, by contrast, has a very Victorian feel and, well, is uninspiring. Luckily, though, thermodynamics is important enough, lying behind ...
Post a Comment
Read more