DOCSLIB.ORG

Shakey: from Conception to History

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shakey: from Conception to History Articles Shakey: From Conception to History Benjamin Kuipers, Edward A. Feigenbaum, Peter E. Hart, Nils J. Nilsson ■ Shakey the Robot, conceived 50 years An Introduction ago, was a seminal contribution to AI. Shakey perceived its world, planned Benjamin Kuipers how to achieve a goal, and acted to car- At AAAI-15 (25–29 January 2015) in Austin, Texas, we met to ry out that plan. This was revolution- ary. At the 29th AAAI Conference on celebrate the impact of the Shakey project, which took place Artifcial Intelligence, attendees gath- from 1966 to 1972 at the Stanford Research Institute (now ered to celebrate Shakey and to gain SRI International) in Menlo Park. insights into how the AI revolution We researchers in artifcial intelligence during this time in moves ahead. The celebration included history have the privilege of working on some of the most a panel that was chaired by Benjamin fundamental and exciting scientifc and engineering prob- Kuipers and featured AI pioneers Ed lems of all time: What is a mind? How can a physical object Feigenbaum, Peter Hart, and Nils Nils- have a mind? son. This article includes written ver- Some of the work going on today will appear in future text- sions of the contributions of those pan- elists. —ed. books, even centuries from now. We gain insights into our own struggles in the feld today by learning about the his- torical struggles of great scientists of the past about whom we read in today’s textbooks. The textbooks tempt us to think that they moved surely and confdently from questions to answers. In reality, they were frequently as confused then as we are now, by the mysterious phenomena they were trying to understand. When we read their history, we know the 88 AI MAGAZINE Copyright © 2017, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence. All rights reserved. ISSN 0738-4602 Articles answers they were seeking, and we can learn from the ber Shakey as slowly and laboriously computing blind alleys they spent time in, and the insights that models of its environment; planning; moving and led them to the right paths. navigating its way around obstacles toward a goal on Artifcial intelligence marks its birth at the 1956 the far side of one large room. Dartmouth Conference. There have been many Fast forward to some recent news about grandchil- important milestones along the way. The important dren of Shakey, from Manuela Veloso at Carnege Mel- milestone we will celebrate today is the Shakey proj- lon University (CMU): ect, which created a physical robot that could per- I am very pleased to tell you that today, on November ceive its environment and the objects within it. 18, 2014, the CoBot robots (3 of them) have jointly Shakey could make a plan to achieve a goal state. And autonomously navigated for 1,000 km in our multi- it could carry out that plan with physical actions in floor SCS buildings at Carnegie Mellon University! the continuous world. The Shakey project laid a A great-grandchild of Shakey, Stanford’s self-dri- foundation for decades of subsequent research. We ving car Stanley, the car that drove itself across the are here to celebrate and understand that project. Mojave Desert, is in the Smithsonian National Air The centerpiece of the Shakey celebration was a and Space Museum in Washington, DC. Other cars panel presentation at AAAI-15, designed to give the like Stanley, built at Google, have driven more than audience an understanding and appreciation of the 700,000 miles, navigating the San Francisco Bay Area process of the research in the Shakey project, and of and other roads, according to the San Jose Mercury the long-term impact of that work on the larger feld News of November 12, 2014. (Consider this: Shakey’s of AI. The goal was to have three speakers address (1) traversal, integrated over the whole life of the exper- the state of the art in AI before the Shakey project (Ed iment, probably never made it to one kilometer). Feigenbaum); (2) the progress of the Shakey project Shakey’s grandchildren on Mars are still having a itself (Peter Hart); and (3) the impact of the Shakey productive long life — 11 years into a planned 90-day project on the future of AI (Nils Nilsson). visit, semiautonomously assisting planetary scien- tists. Celebrating Shakey and Its Builders I would now like to tell you personal stories that together made the importance of Shakey research Edward A. Feigenbaum vivid to me. The history of science is a source of knowledge of the First Story complex search for solutions to diffcult problems. Not only is this history endlessly intriguing and awe- In 1993, a major Japanese corporation asked me to inspiring; but also it should be of particular interest do an evaluation of the quality of a robotics project to AI scientists because this kind of complex problem that its research lab been working on for several solving and discovery is at the heart of many of our years. After signing a nondisclosure agreement, I was theories of mental activity. shown a robot that was “humanoid,” but very big Life is lived in the moment. Everything else is (scary, actually). Tethered to a power source, its memory and stories. The word history itself contains motion was fuid, a marvel of modern electro- the word story. This talk is constructed as several sto- mechanical engineering. ries of the Shakey project situated in its time, and Though heavy, it could walk reliably without among other landmark AI projects. falling, and it could even climb a fight of stairs. But I have been lucky enough to have lived and this creature had no Mind. It did no symbolic pro- worked through the entire 60 years of AI, from early cessing, no problem solving. It did not have goal- 1956, months before the famous “founding” Dart- directed behavior. mouth Conference, to today’s AAAI-2015. My stories There was more than enough space inside for a PC- are drawn from those 60 years of memories, helped, sized computer and there was plenty of power. What but only a little, by the best memory assistant ever, this project lacked were scientists and engineers the web. trained in AI, or even trained in software systems. My role today is to set the historical context in There were no young Nils Nilssons, no young Peter which the Shakey project was born, lived a remark- Harts, no young Bert Raphaels or Richard Fikes — able but short life, and was terminated. Shakey and of course no visionary like Charles Rosen to inte- research set the stage for decades of important exper- grate AI with electromechanical engineering. imental work in AI and robotics, and in other AI And this was 1993, twenty years after the end of the applications that will be mentioned later by Nils Nils- Shakey project! It can be perilous to ignore scientifc son. history. I phoned several well-known robotics scientists to ask about the grandchildren of Shakey. All of them Second Story said the robots they developed were grandchildren of The Computer History Museum in Mountain View, Shakey. California, is the world’s premier museum for the his- As shown in an original Shakey video, we remem- tory of computers and information technology and is SPRING 2017 89 Articles recognized for its interpretation of that history. In The AI science had a workable set of ideas about January 2011, the museum opened its permanent how to use heuristic search to solve problems. But exhibition, called Revolution. Here is a quote from proving things about heuristic search had to wait the museum’s press release: until later (the Shakey group’s A*). Some powerful Ten years in the making, Revolution is the product of successful experiments had been done: the Logic the Museum’s professional staff collaborating with Theorist; Gelernter’s Geometry Theorem Proving designers, content producers and more than 200 program; Slagle’s calculus problem solving programs experts, pioneers and historians around the world. are examples. These were all on the “cognitive” side Revolution showcases 20 different areas of comput- of AI work. On this side, much discussion and ener- ers, computer science, semiconductors, and commu- gy was focused on generality in problem solving: nications, from early history to futuristic visions. Newell and Simon with means-ends analysis; Among those 20 areas is one called AI and Robotics. McCarthy and other “logicists” with theorem prov- For each area, the museum staff has chosen one ing. historical artifact to be the icon exhibit for the area. On the “perceptual” side of AI work, a similar sto- For AI and Robotics, the icon is Shakey the Robot, ry can be told about research on vision. There were beautifully exhibited. several basic workable techniques involving line fnd- The museum could have chosen any one of a ing, curve fnding, and putting elements together dozen or more landmark AI artifacts. It could have into logical descriptions of objects. Generality of the chosen AI’s frst heuristic problem-solving program techniques was also an issue, as it still is today. (the Logic Theorist of Newell, Shaw, and Simon); or a What did we have with which to do this work? Our speech-understanding program from Reddy; or one programming languages were great! List processing of the early expert systems from our Stanford group; was invented at CMU and then made more powerful or Deep Blue, the AI system that beat the world’s and beautiful in LISP at the Massachusetts Institute of chess champion. It could have … but in the end the Technology (MIT).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • UC Berkeley Previously Published Works
    UC Berkeley UC Berkeley Previously Published Works Title Building the Second Mind, 1961-1980: From the Ascendancy of ARPA-IPTO to the Advent of Commercial Expert Systems Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7ck3q4f0 ISBN 978-0-989453-4-6 Author Skinner, Rebecca Elizabeth Publication Date 2013-12-31 eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California Building the Second Mind, 1961-1980: From the Ascendancy of ARPA to the Advent of Commercial Expert Systems copyright 2013 Rebecca E. Skinner ISBN 978 09894543-4-6 Forward Part I. Introduction Preface Chapter 1. Introduction: The Status Quo of AI in 1961 Part II. Twin Bolts of Lightning Chapter 2. The Integrated Circuit Chapter 3. The Advanced Research Projects Agency and the Foundation of the IPTO Chapter 4. Hardware, Systems and Applications in the 1960s Part II. The Belle Epoque of the 1960s Chapter 5. MIT: Work in AI in the Early and Mid-1960s Chapter 6. CMU: From the General Problem Solver to the Physical Symbol System and Production Systems Chapter 7. Stanford University and SRI Part III. The Challenges of 1970 Chapter 8. The Mansfield Amendment, “The Heilmeier Era”, and the Crisis in Research Funding Chapter 9. The AI Culture Wars: the War Inside AI and Academia Chapter 10. The AI Culture Wars: Popular Culture Part IV. Big Ideas and Hardware Improvements in the 1970s invert these and put the hardware chapter first Chapter 11. AI at MIT in the 1970s: The Semantic Fallout of NLR and Vision Chapter 12. Hardware, Software, and Applications in the 1970s Chapter 13.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Latency: Red, White, and Blue Managing the National and International Security Consequences of Disruptive Technologies Zachary S
    Strategic Latency: Red, White, and Blue Managing the National and International Security Consequences of Disruptive Technologies Zachary S. Davis and Michael Nacht, editors Center for Global Security Research Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory February 2018 Disclaimer: This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, nor any of their employees makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or Lawrence Livermore National Security, LLC, and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes. LLNL-BOOK-746803 Strategic Latency: Red, White, and Blue: Managing the National and International Security Consequences of Disruptive Technologies Zachary S. Davis and Michael Nacht, editors Center for Global Security Research Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory February
    [Show full text]
  • DARPA Grand Challenge - Wikipedia 1 of 11
    DARPA Grand Challenge - Wikipedia 1 of 11 DARPA Grand Challenge The DARPA Grand Challenge is a prize competition for American autonomous vehicles, funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, the most prominent research organization of the United States Department of Defense. Congress has authorized DARPA to award cash prizes to further DARPA's mission to sponsor revolutionary, high- payoff research that bridges the gap between fundamental discoveries and military use. The initial DARPA Grand Challenge was created to spur the development of technologies needed to create the first fully autonomous ground vehicles capable of completing a substantial off-road course within a limited time. The third event, the DARPA Urban Challenge extended the initial Challenge to The site of the DARPA Grand Challenge on race autonomous operation in a mock urban environment. day, fronted by the Team Case vehicle, DEXTER The most recent Challenge, the 2012 DARPA Robotics Challenge, focused on autonomous emergency- maintenance robots. The first competition of the DARPA Grand Challenge was held on March 13, 2004 in the Mojave Desert region of the United States, along a 150-mile (240 km) route that follows along the path of Interstate 15 from just before Barstow, California to just past the California–Nevada border in Primm. None of the robot vehicles finished the route. Carnegie Mellon University's Red Team and car Sandstorm (a converted Humvee) traveled the farthest distance, completing 11.78 km (7.32 mi) of the course before getting hung up on a rock after making a switchback turn. No winner was declared, and the cash prize was not given.
    [Show full text]
  • Future Directions 2007 Getting Ready for What Comes Next
    Future Directions 2007 Getting ready for what comes next '(ULFNVRQ-&ROOLHU60RQFNWRQ%%URWHQ-*LHVEUHFKW07UHQWLQL'+DQQD5 &KHVQH\'0DF.D\69HUUHW5$QGHUVRQ DefenceR&DCanada-Suffield 'HIHQFH5 '&DQDGD 7HFKQLFDO0HPRUDQGXP '5'&6XIILHOG70 'HFHPEHU Future Directions 2007 Getting ready for what comes next '(ULFNVRQ-&ROOLHU60RQFNWRQ%%URWHQ-*LHVEUHFKW07UHQWLQL'+DQQD5 &KHVQH\'0DF.D\69HUUHW5$QGHUVRQ DefenceR&DCanada-Suffield DefenceR&DCanada±Suffield TechnicalMemorandum DRDCSuffieldTM 'HFHPEHU2007 Author D. Erickson Defence R & D Canada - Suffield Approved by D. Hanna Head/Tactical Vehicle Systems Section Approved for release by Dr. R. Clewley Chairman/Document Review Panel © Her Majesty the Queen as represented by the Minister of National Defence, 2007 © Sa majesté la reine, représentée par le ministre de la Défense nationale, 2007 Abstract ThispapersummarizestheFutureDirections2007planningsymposium’soutcomes thatwasheldbyDRDCSuffieldstaffon17and18September2007.Participants proposedunconstrainedfutureautonomyscenarios,outliningwhattheysawasthenext step.Participantpresentationswereusedtoextractcommontimelinesandthemes aboutautonomoussystemsdevelopmentandmilitaryrobotics.Thissymposiumalso reviewedtheVWDWHRIWKHDUW,currentprograms,criticalresearchareas,andindicated promisingfutureresearchavenuesthatfitthecurrenttrends.Thesymposiumalso reviewedthepracticalityofreachingfullUnmannedVehicles(UxV)autonomyand recommendsamanintheloopsystemsconceptfortheforeseeablefuture.Giventhis systemconceptreality,itrecognizedanimportantshiftinfocustointroducemore “automaticity”soonerasanotherwaytoimpacttheclientandbringaboutautonomyin
    [Show full text]
  • Shakey 2016 - How Much Does It Take to Redo Shakey the Robot? David Speck, Christian Dornhege, and Wolfram Burgard
    IEEE ROBOTICS AND AUTOMATION LETTERS. PREPRINT VERSION. ACCEPTED JANUARY, 2017 1 Shakey 2016 - How Much Does it Take to Redo Shakey the Robot? David Speck, Christian Dornhege, and Wolfram Burgard Abstract—Shakey the robot was one of the first autonomous robots that showed impressive capabilities of navigation and mobile manipulation. Since then, robotics research has made great progress showing more and more capable robotic systems for a large variety of application domains and tasks. In this paper we look back on decades of research by rebuilding Shakey with modern robotics technology in the open-source Shakey 2016 system. Hereby we demonstrate the impact of research by showing that ideas from the original Shakey are still alive in state-of-the-art systems, while robotics in general has improved to deliver more robust and more capable software and hardware. Our Shakey 2016 system has been implemented on real robots and leverages mostly open-source software. We experimentally evaluate the system in real-world scenarios on a PR2 robot Fig. 1: Shakey at the Computer History Museum in Mountain View, California and a Turtlebot-based robot and particularly investigate the (left); The PR2 (middle) and the modified Turtlebot (right) used for the Shakey development effort. The experiments documented in this paper 2016 system. demonstrate that results from robotics research are readily available for building complex robots like Shakey within a short be gained. Another central point for the research community amount of time and little effort. is availability. Complex systems require multiple different components that are ideally available to any roboticist to be Index Terms—Autonomous Agents, AI-Based Methods able to utilize state-of-the-art algorithms.
    [Show full text]
  • A Timeline of Artificial Intelligence
    A Timeline of Artificial Intelligence by piero scaruffi | www.scaruffi.com All of these events are explained in my book "Intelligence is not Artificial". TM, ®, Copyright © 1996-2019 Piero Scaruffi except pictures. All rights reserved. 1960: Henry Kelley and Arthur Bryson invent backpropagation 1960: Donald Michie's reinforcement-learning system MENACE 1960: Hilary Putnam's Computational Functionalism ("Minds and Machines") 1960: The backpropagation algorithm 1961: Melvin Maron's "Automatic Indexing" 1961: Karl Steinbuch's neural network Lernmatrix 1961: Leonard Scheer's and John Chubbuck's Mod I (1962) and Mod II (1964) 1961: Space General Corporation's lunar explorer 1962: IBM's "Shoebox" for speech recognition 1962: AMF's "VersaTran" robot 1963: John McCarthy moves to Stanford and founds the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (SAIL) 1963: Lawrence Roberts' "Machine Perception of Three Dimensional Solids", the birth of computer vision 1963: Jim Slagle writes a program for symbolic integration (calculus) 1963: Edward Feigenbaum's and Julian Feldman's "Computers and Thought" 1963: Vladimir Vapnik's "support-vector networks" (SVN) 1964: Peter Toma demonstrates the machine-translation system Systran 1965: Irving John Good (Isidore Jacob Gudak) speculates about "ultraintelligent machines" (the "singularity") 1965: The Case Institute of Technology builds the first computer-controlled robotic arm 1965: Ed Feigenbaum's Dendral expert system 1965: Gordon Moore's Law of exponential progress in integrated circuits ("Cramming more components
    [Show full text]
  • A Miniaturized Four-Wheel Robotic Vehicle for Autonomous Driving Research in Off-Road Scenarios
    A MINIATURIZED FOUR-WHEEL ROBOTIC VEHICLE FOR AUTONOMOUS DRIVING RESEARCH IN OFF-ROAD SCENARIOS Lucas A. C. de O. Nogueira∗, Mauro F. Koyamay, Rafael de A. Cordeiroz, Alexandre M. Ribeiro∗, Samuel S. Buenoz, Ely C. de Paiva∗ ∗Faculdade de Engenharia Mecânica (FEM) da Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP) Rua Mendenleyv, 200, Cidade Universitária, 13083-860 Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil yCentro de Tecnologia da Informação Renato Archer - DRVC / CTI Rod. D. Pedro I, km 143,6 - 13081-970 Campinas, São Paulo, Brasil zInstituto Superior Técnico - IDMEC / IST Av. Rovisco Pais ,1 - 1049-001 Lisboa - Portugal Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected] Abstract— This article presents a miniaturized four-wheel robotic vehicle for autonomous driving research. It enables experiments in situations where testing with full-size vehicles becomes dangerous or troublesome. The article describes the physical structure of the vehicle, its actuators and sensing capabilities and the ROS-based software architecture. The vehicle will serve as a platform for future research in the areas of Perception, Planning and Control, particularly for off-road scenario. Validation results are presented which demonstrate that the vehicle is ready to be used in further research applications. Keywords— Autonomous Navigation, Outdoor Robotics. Resumo— Esse artigo apresenta um veículo de quatro rodas em escala para pesquisa em navegação autônoma. Ele possibilitará experimentos em cenários onde testes com carros de tamanho regular se tornam perigosos ou problemáticos. O artigo descreve a estrutura física do veículo, seus sensores e atuadores, e sua arquitetura de software baseado em ROS.
    [Show full text]
  • The Early Robots Classes of Robots
    The Early Robots Classes of Robots Slave manipulator teleoperated by a human master Limited-Sequence manipulator Teach-replay robot Computer-controlled robot Intelligent robot Research Issues Hardware (out of scope) Motor Control Mobility Surfaces – smooth or rough, indoor or outdoor, stairs/holes, obstacles Wheels, legs, tracks Manipulation gripper design, force-feedback, grasp pose Sensing contact/non-contact sensors, laser range-finders, visible light cameras, structured light, sonar Planning representation and mapping of 3D world, navigation, path with workspace, task satisfaction, obstacle avoidance Control integration of motor control, , sensing, navigation, communication, execution monitoring, failure detection/correction Communication human interface, results, monitoring, task specification Outline Lecture 1; Bristol’s Tortoise (1948-1949) Johns Hopkins’ Ferdinand & Beast (1960) Stanford Cart (1970-1979) SRI’s Shakey (1966 – 1972) Max Planck Tubingen’s Braitenburg’s Vehicles (1984) U Munich’s VaMoRs (1986+) Lecture 2: Honda’s P3 (1986+) MIT’s Subsumption Robots (1986+) CMU’s Dante II (1994-1999) MIT’s Kismet (1998-2000) JPL’s CLARAty and Rocky 7 (2000) Walter’s tortoises (1948-9) • Grey Walter wanted to prove that rich connections between a small number of brain cells could give rise to very complex behaviors - essentially that the secret of how the brain worked lay in how it was wired up. • His first robots, which he used to call "Machina Speculatrix" and named Elmer and Elsie, were constructed between 1948 and 1949 and were often described as tortoises due to their shape and slow rate of movement - and because they 'taught us’ about the secrets of organisation and life. • The three-wheeled tortoise robots were capable of phototaxis, by which they could find their way to a recharging station when they ran low on battery power.
    [Show full text]
  • A Cognitive Resource Management Framework for Autonomous Ground Vehicle Sensing
    A COGNITIVE RESOURCE MANAGEMENT FRAMEWORK FOR AUTONOMOUS GROUND VEHICLE SENSING By GREGORY A. GARCIA A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA 2010 © 2010 Gregory Anthony Garcia 2 To Rachael, Gregorio, Miriam, and Rosemarie 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to start by thanking my family for their continued support over these last nine years as I have pursued both undergraduate and graduate degrees while attending the University of Florida. They have encouraged me to strive for the very best, and they have always led by example. I thank my wife Rachael for her patience and understanding, for putting everything on- hold so I could further my education. She was my source of motivation when the tasks seemed most daunting. She is my biggest fan and best friend. I would also like to express my gratitude to Dr. Carl Crane for inspiring me to pursue a career in robotics and for affording me all the opportunities I have received while being a graduate student at the Center for Intelligent Machines and Robotics. His guidance has helped me navigate my way through my undergraduate and graduate education. Similarly, I would like to thank my committee members, Dr. Antonio Arroyo, Dr. Douglas Dankel, Dr. John Schueller, and Dr. Gloria Wiens for their valuable guidance over the years. This research would not have been possible without the support of the Air Force Research Laboratory at Tyndall Air Force Base in Panama City, Florida. I offer a sincere thank you to their staff for allowing me to work on-site in collaboration with them over the years.
    [Show full text]
  • Warehouse Automation
    THE EVOLUTION OF WAREHOUSE AUTOMATION 1910 Early Material Handling Automation HENRY FORD 1914 1920 1919 SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY Supply Chain Education Programs 1930 1940 RFID HARRY STOCKMAN 1948 1950 1950 LESLIE H. BOWES Check Weighing Bar Code JOSEPH WOODLAND AND BERNARD SILVER 1952 1953 BERRETT ELECTRONICS AGV’s Operations Research Education Program MIT 1956 1960 1960 SENSORMATIC, CHECKPOINT AND KNOGO RFID AS/RS Pallets DEMAG 1962 1966 STANFORD Stanford Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (SAIL) AS/RS Cases S.I. SYSTEMS 1968 Commercial Use of Bar Code UGPIC 1970 1970 1969 GEORGE VON GAL Combination Palletizer/Depalletizer Mini-Load AS/RS DAIFUKU 1972 1960 - 1970 Tilt-Tray Sorters 1980 1979 CARNEGIE MELLON The Robotics Institute Warehouse Management System 1980-90 1990 E-Commerce AMAZON/EBAY 1995 1995 FREEMARKETS e-Auctions Mega DC’s 1998-2005 2000 1998 MIT Logistics Education Program Mixed Case Palletizing Software PUZZLE, FRAUNHOFER INSTITUTE 2000 2000 B2B e-Commerce 2002 WITRON Automated Case Pick Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (CSAIL) MIT 2003 2003 KIVA SYSTEMS Rovers Robotics Education Program WPI 2007 2008 SCHAEFER SYSTEMS Automated Case Pick National Robotics Roadmap Initiative 2009 2010 2011 Obama launches National Robotics Initiative AF/SF (Autonomous Fleet-Based Storage & Fulfillment) SYMBOTIC 2012 2020 Economic Driver Benefit EARLY MATERIAL MATRIXSELECT CASE HANDLING AUTOMATION/ AS/RS PALLETS AS/RS CASES TILT-TRAY SORTERS SHOE SORTERS STORAGE AND SELECTION CONVEYORS Henry Ford Demag S.I. Systems Developed to simultaneously Sandvik AB Symbotic sort irregularly shaped products for items that slip Henry Ford was one of The first pallet Automated S.I. Systems later developed off the tray by gravity.
    [Show full text]
  • Shakey: from Conception to History
    Articles Shakey: From Conception to History Benjamin Kuipers, Edward A. Feigenbaum, Peter E. Hart, Nils J. Nilsson I Shakey the Robot, conceived 50 years An Introduction ago, was a seminal contribution to AI. Shakey perceived its world, planned Benjamin Kuipers how to achieve a goal, and acted to car- At AAAI-15 (25–29 January 2015) in Austin, Texas, we met to ry out that plan. This was revolution- ary. At the 29th AAAI Conference on celebrate the impact of the Shakey project, which took place Artificial Intelligence, attendees gath- from 1966 to 1972 at the Stanford Research Institute (now ered to celebrate Shakey and to gain SRI International) in Menlo Park. insights into how the AI revolution We researchers in artificial intelligence during this time in moves ahead. The celebration included history have the privilege of working on some of the most a panel that was chaired by Benjamin fundamental and exciting scientific and engineering prob- Kuipers and featured AI pioneers Ed lems of all time: What is a mind? How can a physical object Feigenbaum, Peter Hart, and Nils Nils- have a mind? son. This article includes written ver- Some of the work going on today will appear in future text- sions of the contributions of those pan- elists. —ed. books, even centuries from now. We gain insights into our own struggles in the field today by learning about the his- torical struggles of great scientists of the past about whom we read in today’s textbooks. The textbooks tempt us to think that they moved surely and confidently from questions to answers.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography at Ro.Co.Co. Laboratory
    Bibliography at Ro.Co.Co. Laboratory Ro.Co.Co. Laboratory May 20, 2016 References [1] Robocup Rescue Web Site. http://robomec.cs.kobe-u.ac.jp/robocup- rescue. [2] Extra Material Web Page. http://www.dis.uniroma1.it/simziparo/pnp extras.html. [3] AAAI 2004 robot competition and exhibition, palantir.swarthmore.edu/aaai04/. [4] The boost libraries, www.boost.org. [5] Carmen project, www-2.cs.cmu.edu/∼carmen/. [6]A comparison on Internet search engines. http://www.state.ia.us/educate/depteduc/offtech/search.html. [7] Context web, http://www.context-web.org/. [8] Iros 02 cleaning contest, iros02.epfl.ch/contest.php. [9] Ontolingua. http://www-ksl.stanford.edu/knowledge-sharing/ontolingua/ontolingua.html. [10] Orocos project, www.orocos.org. [11] Papers relating Internet search engines and tools. http://catriona.lib.strath.ac.uk/ISC460. [12] Performance metrics for intelligent systems workshop. http://www.isd.mel.nist.gov/research areas/research engineering/Performance Metrics/PerMIS 2003/. [13] Robocup, www.robocup.org. [14] Robogames, robogames.net/index.shtml. [15] WordNet: A Lexical Database for English. http://www.cogsci.princeton.edu/ wn/. [16] Photomodeler. http://www.photomodeler.com, 2000. [17] Robot host contest. http://www.andrew.cmu.edu/˜tlauwers/robohost/, 2003. [18] 2005. 1 [19] P. Abbeel, M. Quigley, and A. Y. Ng. Using inaccurate models in rein- forcement learning. In Proceedings of International Conference on Ma- chine Learning (ICML), 2006. [20] A. Aboshosha and A. Zell. Adaptation of rescue robot behaviour in unknown terrains based on stochastic and fuzzy logic approaches. In Proceedings of 2003 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2003.
    [Show full text]