Weak Robots
We expect robots to work for us,/performing a range of services. They are our servants. After all,/the word robot comes from robota,/a Slavic word meaning “slave” or “servant.” But is it possible for us/to form a more cooperative relationship with robots?
When we think about robot technology,/we often think about autonomous robots/which can work independently of human beings. Space probes which wander across the surface of Mars. Delivery robots that drop packages right on our doorsteps. Our vision of the future/is a vision of autonomous robots/driving our cars,/cleaning our houses,/cooking our meals. They might be called “strong” robots,/in the sense that they can work without human help.
While we wait for that future,/we make do with “weak” robots/like the cleaning robot that sweeps our floors. The little guy is cute/but not very smart. He’s always getting tangled up in electrical cords. In order to help him clean the room/without getting into trouble,/you might start by picking up things/which could be in his way.
The room gets cleaned up. But when you ask:/“Who cleaned this room?”/you make an interesting discovery. The little robot did not clean the room by itself. You did not clean the room by yourself. The two of you did it together. The robot cleverly managed to get your cooperation/in cleaning the room. What’s interesting about the little cleaning robot/is that, for all his weakness,/he has become part of your family.
Many robot engineers/find dependence on humans to be a defect. They want to make weak robots stronger,/which is to say,/more independent of people.
However,/the little episode above suggests/that weak robots might help create a positive relationship/between robots and humans. In fact,/Okada Michio,/a professor at Toyohashi University of Technology,/sees weakness as a virtue. He is working on robots/which are designed not to work without human interaction.
Take a wastebasket called Sociable Trash Box (STB),/for example. Its job is to see that trash gets picked up. This weak robot approaches the trash/and circles around it helplessly,/waiting for someone’s assistance. When people come along/and see the robot moving its body/as if asking for help,/they usually pick up the trash/and place it in the basket. STB bows,/as if to say,/“Thanks!”
In the conventional way of thinking,/a room cleaner that gets tangled up in a cord,/or a machine that cannot pick up the trash by itself,/is weak or maybe defective. But from Okada’s point of view,/this weakness draws out our cooperative spirit. Far from being dehumanizing,/working with a robot like STB/can make us more human.
“OK,” you may say,/“but how about the human-AI interactions we already enjoy? I can talk to my smartphone. I ask her a question. She answers. We communicate.” But is that really communication? How often does your smartphone call you up?
Okada wants us/to think of a more intimate human-robot relationship. Real communication/is not a matter of me talking to you /and you talking to me,/but rather a case of us /communicating with one another. Is this sort of communication possible/between humans and robots? Perhaps.
Think of babies. Babies cry for milk. They show their satisfaction by becoming quiet. Parents learn to listen to the way their baby cries/and watch their baby’s reactions. Although no words are exchanged,/a real form of communication exists between them.
Raising an infant involves interaction. The baby is cared for/and gets the milk that it wants. The parents experience joy/in looking after the child. The baby’s helplessness and weakness/draw out the parents’ love and support. Could this natural form of communication/also take place between humans and robots? Okada is looking at how such a coexistence might occur.
In order to explore this possibility,/Okada and his colleague made Mako-no-te,/a small one-armed robot which can walk. When walking hand-in-hand,/the robot gives you cues,/adjusting the direction and speed/by pulling your hand with its arm. You infer the robot’s intentions. Apparently,/just walking with the robot/helps you build an interpersonal relationship with it. A kind of natural form of communication/seems to be taking place/between the human and the robot.
Okada’s concept of weak robots/is not just of theoretical interest;/it may have a practical implication. One of the main concerns in present-day Japan/is the rapid growth of its aging population,/an increase which means more and more care workers are needed. In reality,/however,/caregivers are in desperately short supply. As part of the solution to the problem,/the government and private sectors/are introducing care robots in nursing homes.
Here are a few examples of robots at work. One is a back support device which is designed to assist caregivers/when they lift and move patients. Another type of robot provides services/such as bringing tea. These robots satisfy practical needs,/easing the burden of caregivers.
But there are other types of robots/whose main function is to provide companionship/and make the environment more friendly and livable. A robot baby seal is an example. Not only does it give comfort to the elderly,/but it also gives a sense of security. Perhaps it is in this area/that Okada’s weak robots have the greatest potential for application.
Professor Okada and his team/want us to think of robots as our companions. They are pointing the way to a future/in which people and robots can exist in harmony,/learn to treat one another with respect,/and, just possibly,/enjoy one another’s company.
We expect robots to work for us,/performing a range of services. They are our servants. After all,/the word robot comes from robota,/a Slavic word meaning “slave” or “servant.” But is it possible for us/to form a more cooperative relationship with robots?
When we think about robot technology,/we often think about autonomous robots/which can work independently of human beings. Space probes which wander across the surface of Mars. Delivery robots that drop packages right on our doorsteps. Our vision of the future/is a vision of autonomous robots/driving our cars,/cleaning our houses,/cooking our meals. They might be called “strong” robots,/in the sense that they can work without human help.
While we wait for that future,/we make do with “weak” robots/like the cleaning robot that sweeps our floors. The little guy is cute/but not very smart. He’s always getting tangled up in electrical cords. In order to help him clean the room/without getting into trouble,/you might start by picking up things/which could be in his way.
The room gets cleaned up. But when you ask:/“Who cleaned this room?”/you make an interesting discovery. The little robot did not clean the room by itself. You did not clean the room by yourself. The two of you did it together. The robot cleverly managed to get your cooperation/in cleaning the room. What’s interesting about the little cleaning robot/is that, for all his weakness,/he has become part of your family.
Many robot engineers/find dependence on humans to be a defect. They want to make weak robots stronger,/which is to say,/more independent of people.
However,/the little episode above suggests/that weak robots might help create a positive relationship/between robots and humans. In fact,/Okada Michio,/a professor at Toyohashi University of Technology,/sees weakness as a virtue. He is working on robots/which are designed not to work without human interaction.
Take a wastebasket called Sociable Trash Box (STB),/for example. Its job is to see that trash gets picked up. This weak robot approaches the trash/and circles around it helplessly,/waiting for someone’s assistance. When people come along/and see the robot moving its body/as if asking for help,/they usually pick up the trash/and place it in the basket. STB bows,/as if to say,/“Thanks!”
In the conventional way of thinking,/a room cleaner that gets tangled up in a cord,/or a machine that cannot pick up the trash by itself,/is weak or maybe defective. But from Okada’s point of view,/this weakness draws out our cooperative spirit. Far from being dehumanizing,/working with a robot like STB/can make us more human.
“OK,” you may say,/“but how about the human-AI interactions we already enjoy? I can talk to my smartphone. I ask her a question. She answers. We communicate.” But is that really communication? How often does your smartphone call you up?
Okada wants us/to think of a more intimate human-robot relationship. Real communication/is not a matter of me talking to you /and you talking to me,/but rather a case of us /communicating with one another. Is this sort of communication possible/between humans and robots? Perhaps.
Think of babies. Babies cry for milk. They show their satisfaction by becoming quiet. Parents learn to listen to the way their baby cries/and watch their baby’s reactions. Although no words are exchanged,/a real form of communication exists between them.
Raising an infant involves interaction. The baby is cared for/and gets the milk that it wants. The parents experience joy/in looking after the child. The baby’s helplessness and weakness/draw out the parents’ love and support. Could this natural form of communication/also take place between humans and robots? Okada is looking at how such a coexistence might occur.
In order to explore this possibility,/Okada and his colleague made Mako-no-te,/a small one-armed robot which can walk. When walking hand-in-hand,/the robot gives you cues,/adjusting the direction and speed/by pulling your hand with its arm. You infer the robot’s intentions. Apparently,/just walking with the robot/helps you build an interpersonal relationship with it. A kind of natural form of communication/seems to be taking place/between the human and the robot.
Okada’s concept of weak robots/is not just of theoretical interest;/it may have a practical implication. One of the main concerns in present-day Japan/is the rapid growth of its aging population,/an increase which means more and more care workers are needed. In reality,/however,/caregivers are in desperately short supply. As part of the solution to the problem,/the government and private sectors/are introducing care robots in nursing homes.
Here are a few examples of robots at work. One is a back support device which is designed to assist caregivers/when they lift and move patients. Another type of robot provides services/such as bringing tea. These robots satisfy practical needs,/easing the burden of caregivers.
But there are other types of robots/whose main function is to provide companionship/and make the environment more friendly and livable. A robot baby seal is an example. Not only does it give comfort to the elderly,/but it also gives a sense of security. Perhaps it is in this area/that Okada’s weak robots have the greatest potential for application.
Professor Okada and his team/want us to think of robots as our companions. They are pointing the way to a future/in which people and robots can exist in harmony,/learn to treat one another with respect,/and, just possibly,/enjoy one another’s company.