A Brief Overview of the Historical Path of Automata and the Tendency Toward Human Replication and Re-formation

A Brief Overview of the Historical Path of Automata and the Tendency Toward Human Replication and Re-formation

The human desire to replicate and better its own and to artificially create life goes back to the beginning of the development of our species. Jasia Reichardt begins her history of automata by naming the first creator or source as God and the first automaton as Adam.
“And the Lord God formed man of the dust of the ground and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul.”

Reichardt’s history goes on to include creators such as Prometheus, Hephaestus, Pygmalion, Amenhotep, Deadelus, King-shu Tse, Archytas of Tarentum, and Ctesibius straight through human history to more modern individuals such as Roger Bacon, Leonardo da Vinci, Rene Descartes, and Thomas Alva Edison. In every creator we see another example of crafting automaton.

Roger Bacon (1219-94) allegedly perfected an automaton known as the Speaking Head after working on it for seven years. The head was watched for three weeks in anticipation of its first words. When none were spoken, the head was then handed over to an attendant who was instructed to alert Bacon at first sound of words coming from the head. It is said that the first words uttered by the head were “Time is,” which, to the attendant, seemed unimportant and not worthy of calling to Bacon’s attention. Shortly after, the head spoke the words “Time was.” Again the attendant did not notify Bacon. A half hour later, the head then spoke the words “Time has past,” at which point the head collapsed.

Throughout this historical journey, we constantly see inventors creating automaton that replicate the actions of human beings. Edison’s talking dolls invented in 1891 to advertise his phonograph, Rene Descartes’ dancing doll from 1640 that could mimic the motions of human beings (it is said to have been a girl doll to replace his daughter who died at the age of five), or Baron Wolfgang von Kampelen’s 1769 invention, the chess player (a.k.a. The Turk) are all prime examples of early automata creations.

None of these creations were actually investigated scientifically, and thus were not proved to be in working order. Roger Bacon’s head was never actually proved to have spoken the words that the story tells. The fact remains, however, that such heads were being created and rumors circulated for centuries about heads that were able to talk. The thirteenth-century friar and priest Albertus Magnus, famous for his advocacy of a coexistence of science and religion, was said to have used alchemy to make one of these heads. After being found by his disciple, Thomas Aquinas, it goes that Aquinas smashed the head.

Kampelen’s Chess Player was able to beat great chess players of the time, but was actually operated by a human being from within the body of the automata (fig. 2). As Sidney Perkowitz explains:

We would be right to doubt that eighteenth-century technology mimicked the human brain, because the Turk was a hoax. A human hidden inside the cabinet manipulated the figure’s hand to move the chess pieces, as Poe and others surmised. Nevertheless, the Turk teaches us a lesson in how artificial beings affect people, because over its long history, many believed it could play a meaningful game of chess. Apparently we are willing to meet artificial beings halfway, mentally filling in the blanks between what they present and what we want to believe. Perhaps if the chess player had been displayed only as a collection of gears without a human form, viewers would have found it less believable, although the machinery might have impressed them.

Automata show that the yearning for human companionship goes beyond just a need for human-to-human relationships, but to a more evolved form of a different species. Evolution could not provide much more than humanity in its 4.6 billion years of work, so humanity has worked up possibilities for itself in the past six thousand.

In the past century these possibilities have far exceeded what was thought possible during the times of early automata. The advent of electrically powered automata, or robots (a term first coined by Karel Capek in his play R.U.R. in 1921), came with an exponential growth of technology and its implementation into automata and robotics in the 20th century.

Many institutions in the academic, government, and corporate worlds have had a hand in the action of building advanced mobile and cognitive robots (MIT, Carnegie Mellon University, Honda, Sony, DARPA). Two high caliber robots worth noting are ASIMO (Advanced Step in Innovative Mobility) (fig. 3), developed by Honda, and Kismet (fig. 4), developed by Cynthia Breazeal (a graduate student of the Rodney Brooks group at MIT). These two robots were originally developed for two distinct goals: ASIMO to be a successful mobile/walking robot and Kismet to be a socially intelligent robot.
It took a few dozen engineers and more than a decade to develop the walking capabilities of ASIMO. These bi-pedal maneuvers allow for mobility on steep inclines, steps, on one leg, backward, and while turning; all while keeping balance. The ease with which this robot can travel was a giant leap for robotics; it continues to advance year after year to include more human-like rotation and operation. Though not able to speak as well as a robot like Kismet, ASIMO is able to listen and follow directions from a human being. It is also equipped with vision to allow for an understanding of gestures such as pointing in a certain direction, holding a hand up (like a crossing guard’s stop gesture), or give a hand shake when a person extends his or her hand. Honda’s goal is to make robots that have a practical use in society. ASIMO also has a facial recognition program built in, so when a person passes by the robot it takes his or her facial image and applies the appropriate name (and whatever other specific information it has) to be able to greet people individually. With the abilities that Honda has given to ASIMO it is clear that the robot is already capable of performing such roles as hostess, receptionist, postal worker, bank teller, etc. Though this may incite Luddite reactions from some, it could provide great help to human beings with daily tasks.

Kismet is unable to walk like ASIMO, but the relationship that Kismet builds with its human companions is far exceeding. The goal with Kismet was to develop a more social robot that could provide and require interpersonal relationships with human beings. Kismet is equipped with emotional needs and responses (i.e. happy, sad, excited, lonely, threatened, interested) for full interaction with its human friends. If, for instance, a social interaction becomes too close (a human comes too close to Kismet’s face), Kismet will withdraw with either a threatened response or a sleep response where it simply closes its eyes. Reactions are given to any interaction appropriately. When Kismet is scolded for misbehaving it will give a sad response much like a child. The premise, in fact, is to make Kismet a behavioral learning system, akin to the way in which children learn from adults. Human response toward Kismet is much more heartfelt than response towards Asimo because of Kismet’s advanced interpersonal relationship programming. If a human yells at Kismet, for instance, the reaction will likely make the human sympathetic to having hurt the feelings of Kismet. Likewise, subjects seem to enjoy having social interactions that result in providing Kismet with joy and social connectivity. After all, Kismet is designed to show the feeling of loneliness if it goes for long periods of time without social interactions with human beings.

The beauty of ASIMO and Kismet is that they represent some of the most advanced methods of mobility and socialization to date. Moreover, they represent an innate human urge to produce life-like equal beings to socialize and live with. The fact that these robots are becoming so human-like at such a fast pace also adds to the social and political separation between humans and cyborgs, androids (machine built to appear human), and robots. As the abilities of these entities increase, the line between them and us will decrease. Technologies that are being used in such robots are also being advanced for placement into the bodies of human beings. Soon we will also have a shared physical makeup with these robots, with some of us becoming robosapiens.

One final creation that blurs the line between the looks of humans and robots is the android Jules (fig. 5) that has been developed by Hanson Robotics. Hanson Robotics uses advanced software development and materials to create life-like ‘…revolutionary, interactive bio-inspired conversational robots.’ This human counterpart has David Hanson’s frubber skin product (which appears absolutely human), strong artificial intelligence, accurate human emotions and motions, and excellent communication skills. Amazingly, the robot learns as it ages (similar to Kismet) through communication with those around it. A conversation held with Jules is not unlike one you may have with any stranger on the street, with only an occasional kink that would commit to a failure of the Turing Test.

All of these advances are on the pattern of technological exponential growth as defined by Moore’s Law . Ray Kurzweil bases his predictions of technological triumph on this law when he predicts:

Sometime early in this century the intelligence of machines will exceed that of humans. Within a quarter of a century, machines will exhibit the full range of human intellect, emotions and skills, ranging from musical and other creative aptitudes to physical movement. They will claim to have feelings, and, unlike today’s virtual personalities, will be very convincing when they tell us so. By around 2020 a $1,000 computer will at least match the processing power of the human brain. By 2029 the software for intelligence will have been largely mastered, and the average personal computer will be equivalent to 1,000 brains.


[img]http://www.fortunecity.com/emachines/e11/86/graphics/chess/TURK1.gif[/img]
Figure 2: An explanatory illustration of how The Turk may have been controlled by a human from inside the chest.

[img]http://gadgetsandsuch.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/asimo1.png[/img]
Figure 3: Honda's walking robot Asimo

[img]http://image.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2008/04/13/kismet10c.jpg[/img]
Figure 4: Kismet giving a rather human-like expression

[img]http://www.gadgetvenue.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/07/frubber-robot.JPG[/img]
Figure 5: Jules showing off his frubber skin and lifelike expressions.




*excerpt from Formatting Gaia: A Comprehensive Outline of the Photographic Work


http://www.patrickmillard.com/