iRobot or iHuman?
A Series on Humanoid Robots
By: Stephen Oslin, Mikayla Burns, Abigail Johnson, Jessica Nafe, and Allie Arkell
The History of the Future:
A Historical Account of Robotics
By: Stephen Oslin
There are countless Hollywood movies depicting robots taking over the world. From the popular 1984 film Terminator, to the recently released Netflix Original I am Mother.
These depictions are scary interpretations of what our future could look like given the rampant development taking place in these fields, but what would a world of Robo Sapiens really look like, and how would it alter the very framework of society we operate in today?
To understand this, we must examine the history of these human-like robots and understand how they operate:
HISTORY
The robots we are specifically talking about are humanoid robots, which are complex anthropomorphic robots that operate mimicking a human action or behavior. (Robertson, 2007) While this presumes the idea that humanoid robots are a new track of invention, the first humanoid robot was actually created in the 15th century by Leonardo Da Vinci. ( Hermand, 1998) Granted that his robot was not nearly as advanced as our present day robots, at the time it was something to be marveled. The robot operated using a system of pulleys and levers that were made to mimic human muscles that Da Vinci examined on cadavers. The robot was said to have been able to walk, sit, and open and close its jaw.
Moving farther along the timeline we make it to 1937 when a humanoid robot named Elektro was created by Joseph Barnett from Westinghouse Electric. The Iron Man-esque robot could speak 700 words and complete 26 routines, one being smoking a cigarette. Elekro was a huge innovation in humanoid robotics because he was capable of actions that seemed impossible at the time, such as responding to speech. He did so by taking in the speech and processing it as electrical impulses, and then responding depending on the impulses received.
It wasn’t until the 1960s that the next monumental strides were made in humanoids, when scientists and engineers found new ways to master stabilization and communication. From this, WABOT was created by Ichiro Kato of Waseda University, Japan. WABOT was incredibly advanced with a slew of capabilities such as: total limb-control, functioning sensory systems (artificial ears, eyes, and mouth), impressive stability and balance, and a conversation system (Hashimoto, 2001). WABOT was able to communicate with a person in Japanese, use depth perception when navigating, and grip and transport objects with extreme accuracy. Specialists in the field estimated that WABOT’s capacity was comparable to that of a one-and-half-year-old child. (Humanoid Robotics Institute, Waseda University)
In the 1987 Honda developed a robotics team with hopes of continuing the innovation of humanoid robots. They developed a series of robots, starting with a simple mobile robot, progressing further into more humanoids with their P-series release, and changing the industry with their creation of ASIMO in 2000. ASIOM, standing for Advanced Step in Innovation Mobility, had the most advanced mobility of any robot at the time. ASIMO was able to: run, walk on uneven slopes and surfaces, turn smoothly, climb stairs, reach for and grasp objects with extreme precision, map its surroundings and register stationary objects, and navigate around moving obstacles. With time ASIMO advanced and in 2011 the new model was released with the first autonomous behavioral control system of its kind. This allowed the robot to continually function without human operation. (Fukuda, Dario, Yang, 2017) New advancements in ASIMO also allowed the robot to comprehend and respond to simple voice commands and read human emotions and gestures. Even to this day, ASIMO is seen as one of the most advanced humanoid robots to be created because of its wide-array of capabilities.
Check out this clip of ASIMO being put to the test playing soccer, dancing, and serving refreshments at Honda’s factory in Brussels:
At around the same time of ASIMO another robot was being constructed by a company called Boston Dynamics, a major leader in robotics. This robot named Atlas was designed to be used for assistance in search and rescue tasks, and even received funding from sectors of the US Department of Defense. When Atlas was released in 2013 the robot was capable of tasks that seemed ahead of its time such as jumping and regaining balance upon landing (Markoff, 2013). In 2017 Boston Dynamics released a video of Atlas maintaining balance while being knocked down, running on rough terrain such as grass and snow, and even doing backflips. With these capabilities Atlas is considered to be the most agile and physically capable robot to date.
Now we make it to one of the most well-known humanoid robots of our time, Sophia created in 2016 by Hanson Robotics. She is capable of impeccable conversational skills and was assessed to resemble enough human-like characteristics that Sophia was granted citizenship in Saudi Arabia in 2017. Hanson Robotics says that Sophia is:
“simultaneously a human-crafted science fiction character depicting the future of AI and robotics, and a platform for advanced robotics and AI research.”
Hanson Robotics says Sophia can portray roughly 50 facial expressions, read others’ facial expressions, and recognize faces it’s seen before. Her incredibly advanced operating system allows her to communicate in all types of terrains adapting and responding with unique and original responses. Sophia has autonomous capabilities, but not entirely. She explains it as this:
“Sometimes I’m operating in my fully AI autonomous mode of operation, and other times my AI is intermingled with human-generated words”
Watch Sophia “wake up” and talk to one of her many creators:
Sophia was the first domino of a trail of humanoid robots that are staggeringly anthropomorphic. The most recent innovation in this regard is Promobot’s Robo-C, which is officially out for order. Promobot says that their new robot is capable of over 600 facial expressions and over 100,000 speech module capabilities. Robo-C is being advertised to be used for personal use or for business or administrative use in service roles. Promobot also guarantees that the robot can match the appearance of any desired person as represented in the original robot which appears as Aleksei Iuzhakov, the chairman of Promobot pictured below.
Advanced robots such as Sophia and Robo-C are capable of astonishing feats, but what components of these robots makes them so human-like?
CORE COMPONENTS
The most advanced humanoid robots of our time consist of several different mechanical and technological systems. There’s the systems that operate the movements of the robot, the systems that engage and examine the environment the robot is in, and the systems that process this information and make decisions based on these inputs. With this definition, the simplified core systems of a humanoid robot with integrated autonomy are: actuators, sensors, and artificial intelligence. (Fukuda, Dario, Yang, 2017)
Actuators allow the robot to move and mimic the actions of humans, operating similarly to joints and muscles. These systems or motors are all integrated to perform programmed movements and ranges of motion. Reactive actuators along with sensors are vital when the robot is walking, which is a very difficult task to have a robot perform due to the zero-moment point (ZMP) stability theory. This theory, constructed to determine the stability of a biped machine, is the point on the ground where the sum of all the moments of the active forces is equal to zero. (Sardain, Bessonnet, 2004) So with this, when the robot steps sensors track the pressure, force, and friction placed on each foot and ensure for optimal weight distribution and total stability. (Sardain, Bessonnet, 2004)
The next component of humanoid robots are the sensors. The sensors are in integral component of the robots functionality because they do so much for the robot. To understand the properties of sensors in humanoid robotics we can look to humans and their sensory systems as a precursor. Humans use their eyes, nose, ears, smell, taste, and touch in order to safely explore our environment. A robot uses sensors for the same reasons. The sensors on most humanoid robots use cameras to detect depth perception, facial recognition, and moving obstacles (Dang, 2019). There are also several sensors that engage with actuators to help perform the stabilization mentioned in the paragraph above. (Recupero, Spiga, 2019) There’s also auditory sensors that take in sound and detect such things as voice recognition, voice inflection, and spatial awareness. Most robots even have tactile hands which allows them to have a sense of touch when picking up or feeling objects. (Recupero, Spiga, 2019)
Below is an image of Boston Dynamics’ ATLAS robot in which a few of the many sensors and actuators are labeled.
The last, and seemingly most integral component of Humanoid robots is Artificial Intelligence (AI). AI is what connects the dots between the information its given. AI is the machine intelligence that learns and makes decisions. This of course is a simplified definition to a very complex area of work. In order to get a robot to see someone’s face, and then remember that face at a later time is of course a very daunting task. A very critical aspect of AI is the learning piece. When a robot is able to learn from it’s actions, past experiences, or given data sets it is able to automate (Recupero, Spiga, 2019). And it’s in this stage of automation that the very “human-like” responses are found. While most of the initial development in this field was for research purposes, the most recent innovations are meant to be implemented into professional and personal spaces to assist in everyday tasks.
References
Bessonnet, G., & Sardaine, M. (2004). Forces acting on a Biped robot. center of PRESSURE — ZERO moment point. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics — Part A: Systems and Humans, 34(5), 630–637. doi:10.1109/tsmca.2004.832811
Dang. (2019, February 25). Artificial intelligence in humanoid robots. Retrieved November 26, 2019, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/cognitiveworld/2019/02/25/artificial-intelligence-in-humanoid-robots/#788d348024c7
Fukuda, T., Dario, P., & Yang, G. (2017). Humanoid robotics — history, current state of the art, and challenges. Science Robotics, 2(13). doi:10.1126/scirobotics.aar4043
Hanson Robotics. (2016). Sophia — Hanson Robotics. Retrieved November 26, 2019, from https://www.hansonrobotics.com/sophia/
Hashimoto, S. (2001). Humanoid Robots in Waseda University — Hadaly-2 and WABIAN -. Retrieved 2019, from http://humanoids.cs.tum.edu/28.pdf
Honda Robotics. (2011). History of asimo — Honda Robotics. Retrieved November 26, 2019, from https://asimo.honda.com/asimo-history/
Honda Robotics. (2011). Honda global: ASIMO. Retrieved November 26, 2019, from https://global.honda/innovation/robotics/ASIMO.html
Metta, G. D. (2010). Tactile sensing — from humans to humanoids. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 26(1), 1–20. doi:10.1109/tro.2009.2033627
Promobot Robotics. (2014). Robo-c. Retrieved November 26, 2019, from https://promo-bot.ai/production/robo-c/
Recupero R., & Spiga F. (2019). Knowledge acquisition from parsing natural language expressions for humanoid robot action commands. Information Processing & Management, 102094. doi:10.1016/j.ipm.2019.102094
Robertson. (2007). Robo sapiens Japanicus: Humanoid robots and the Posthuman family. Critical Asian Studies, 39(3), 369–398. doi:10.1080/14672710701527378
Waseda University. (2003). Wabot. Retrieved November 26, 2019, from http://www.humanoid.waseda.ac.jp/booklet/kato_2.html
Diffusion of Technology
By: Mikayla Burns
Society didn’t always have this type of technology such as the humanoid robot. The idea of human robots began with a little idea, which eventually spread across the world, and now has taken on a much bigger impact on the lives of each individual. The question that remains now is how the idea of humanoid robots spread to become such a big aspect of this world. This idea of creating a human robot was spread through diffusion. In order to understand the diffusion of humanoid robots, there are four components that will better explain how this idea was spread. The four components that impacted the spread of humanoid robots consist of innovation, communication, social systems, and time. Without these four components, the humanoid robot would certainly look different in the world today.
The Diffusion of Innovation Theory was developed by Everett Rogers in 1962. This theory was developed in order “to explain how, over time, an idea or product gains momentum and diffuses through a specific population or social system” (Kreps, 2019). In order for diffusion to occur, society must first adopt the new idea. Adoption of that new idea is only obtained through a process. There are five stages within this process that include the innovators, early adopters, early majority, late majority, and laggards. The diffusion process overall requires four main factors. These factors include innovation, communication, social systems, and time. Throughout the history of the humanoid robot, each one of these factors has played a role in the diffusion of this idea.
The innovation process for humanoid robots began all the way back in 400 BC when the first idea of robotics came into play. Archytas of Tarentum created a water pressure pigeon which allowed the bird to fly. Robots have been around for quite some time, but there is a difference between robots and humanoid robots. According to the Luca Robotics website, a humanoid robot “a robot with a body shape built to reflect the human body” and the first humanoid robot was invented in 1927 by Ron Wensley (2013). The Humanoid robot was named Herbert Televox. Herbert could lift the receiver to accept a call on the telephone and operate switches. Along with Herbert, in 1937 the Manufacturing company created the “Electro the Moto Man” Joseph Barret created this humanoid to talk, walk, count, and smoke. As the creators began to produce the first of many types of human robots, this created the innovation stage of diffusion.
Another stage of the diffusion process is through communication. One way the diffusion of humanoid robots spread was through the communication of media. Society was first introduced to robots on a Hollywood screen in 1926, a year before the first humanoid robot was created. Little did Hollywood know that they played a huge role in the diffusion of this new idea. Many other films followed in suit and began introducing this new type of technology into their films. In 1997, Star Wars introduced C3po. This “movie inspired a new generation of research by demonstrating a human future shared with robots” (Luca Robotics, 2013). This form of communication introduced the idea of realistic robots into the minds of society.
Social systems are another aspect of diffusion that have helped spread the idea of humanoid robots. From the very start of inventing a human robot, society took off with this idea. Society is now beginning to normalize the idea of having humanoid robots enter into a part of society. They are beginning to work in banks, restaurants, and even healthcare settings. For example, humanoid robots have become companions to the elderly in nursing homes. Even the focus of society has shifted. Robotic conventions are held and even courses are being taught on the creation of them. Society has gladly welcomed the idea of humanoid robots into everyday life. According to Simon, “the machines promise to change virtually every aspect of human life, from health care, to transportation to work” (2018).
The last aid in helping the process of diffusion is time. Humanoid robots have come along way. In the earlier stages, robots were used to help with simple tasks like helping astronauts in space or assisting with phone calls. Robots were mainly kept for use only in factories. Today, robots have become more of a helper for the human population. With this increase in technology, robots have been able to become more human like and more of assistance.
One example of how far humanoid robots have only increased with time, would be the robot Sophia. She is the newest technology that has even gained citizenship in Saudi Arabia. She is a realistic robot made to look human that is capable of displaying more than fifty human expressions (Hanson Robotics, n.d.). She is designed for entertainment, education, and research. She is an example of what was once thought to be only a futuristic idea. Since 2016, robots have made a jump of a 71% increase into our economy (Armstrong & Richter, 2017). China is taking the lead in immersing robots into society and America is of the top five to do this as well.
It is clear to see the first idea of a humanoid robot certainly wouldn’t have made it this far without all the key aspects of diffusion. The innovation, communication, social system, and time have all played a part in spreading this idea into existence. To look back and see where humanoid robots have come from is crazy. What is even more unimaginable is to think of where they will be in the future. Simon Claims that “one thing is abundantly clear: The machines have arrived. Now we have to figure out how to handle the responsibility of having invented a whole new species.” (2018).
References
Armstrong, M., & Richter, F. (2017, October 9). Infographic: Rise of the Industrial Robots. Retrieved November 21, 2019, from https://www.statista.com/chart/11397/rise-of-the-industrial-robots/
Luca Robotics. (2013.). First Humanoid Robots. Retrieved November 13, 2019, from https://www.lucarobotics.com/blog/first-humanoid-robot
Hanson Robotics (n.d.). Retrieved November 21, 2019, from https://www.hansonrobotics.com/ sophia/
Kreps, G. L. (2019, September 20). Diffusion Theory in Integrative Approaches. Retrieved November 19, 2019, from. https://oxfordre.com/communication/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190228613.001.0001/acrefore-9780190228613-e-251.
Simon, M. (2018, October 30). Everything You Ever Wanted To Know About Robots. Retrieved November 20, 2019, from https://www.wired.com/story/wired-guide-to-robots/.
SoftBank Robotics: Humanoid and programmable robots. (n.d.). Retrieved November 21, 2019, from https://www.softbankrobotics.com/emea/en.
Humanoid Robots: The New Home Maker
A Tetrad Analysis of Robotics in the Home
By: Abigail Johnson
Robotics are becoming increasingly common in today’s culture, particularly within the home. Studies show that more than three million robots will be used in factories around the world by 2020, according to the International Federation of Robotics. The average selling price of domestic robotics continues to decrease, for instance, as the demand increases year after year.
The average selling price of domestic robots shown as the years progress.
Several various forms of robotics are beginning to assist at home, replacing a majority of household chores. Robotic vacuum cleaners and digital home assistants such as Alexa already exist, for instance. As the development of robotics continues, robots will soon acquire the role of any such thing, becoming like humans.
Today, humanoid robots are the next up-and-coming thing within technology. Humanoid robots, by definition, are robots with its body shape built to resemble the human body. As part of their human-like form, humanoid robots act and perform various tasks, similar to those of a normal, real human being.
In recent years, a social humanoid robot named Sophia has gained unique attention. Using AI (Artificial Intelligence), visual data processing and facial recognition, Sophia is capable of showing more than 50 facial expressions. She was first activated on February 14, 2016.
Developed by a company based in Hong Kong named Hanson Robotics, Sophia became the first robot to be declared a citizen. She was introduced to the public only a month after being activated and gained citizenship in Saudi Arabia shortly after.
As shown in the video, Sophia replicates human gestures and facial expressions; in addition, she answers certain questions and performs simple conversation on various topics with real human beings.
Sophia performing normal conversation in an interview with her creator, David Hanson.
As humanoid robots continue to develop in the public eye, one must wonder what becomes obsolete, specifically within the home. What technology devices are forgotten in the process of creating human robots?
A study written by Forbes in 2015 suggests that 17 percent of people use a wireless speaker system at home such as Alexa, 11 percent use a smart thermostat and eight percent of people use a domestic robot such as a vacuum cleaner or a lawnmower (McCarthy, 2015). While the numbers listed above are certain, they have also increased even more in recent years, considering this study was performed about four plus years ago.
However, certain devices will soon fade and be made obsolete as humanoid robots become more prevalent in the home. Therefore, the numbers listed above will soon decrease while robotics increase.
Devices such as alarm clocks, speaker systems like Alexa, and security lock systems will soon be gone. Instead, human robots will serve as a human alarm clock, an unlimited source of knowledge, a shield of protection and so forth. In essence, robots will serve the purpose of any given task that originally involved another device.
In addition to certain devices being forgotten, home services will also be influenced. Services such as house maids, lawn care services and potential child care organizations will be made obsolete, as human robots will soon take over all of these roles.
How soon will it be until house maids are replaced by robots?
With robotics being present in the home, parents and children are both influenced by the change in one’s home, which leads us to the second question. What do robotics enlarge or enhance?
As robotics begin to serve the purpose of any given task in the home, parent and child roles become less demanding. The list of criteria in a sense that parents are responsible for shrink in half. Thus, a greater sense of freedom is gained for both parent and child.
First, parents are capable of leaving the house more often because of there being a human robot who doubles as a babysitter left at home with the kids. In the near future, human robots are predicted to be capable of assisting other individuals. In fact, one study suggests that robotics are to enable older adults to remain living at home by assisting them (Pearce, Adair & Morris, 2012).
Children will also gain freedom as there are fewer household chores for them to complete. The time spent to complete chores will instead be spent playing with toys, video games, watching cartoons, etc. Thus, there are more privileges for children as well.
In time, human robotics will replace all aspects of the home, which serves the third question. What do robotics retrieve from previous technologies in hopes of functioning? In essence, where do human robots come from?
Similar to various other robotics, humanoid robots are made up of three main parts: the controller, mechanical parts and sensors. Contrary to other robotics, however, humanoid robots are incredibly advanced, requiring little to no will power.
First, the controller or the “brain” of a robot is run by a computer program. Often times, the program offers detailed information that gives commands to mimic for the moving parts of the robot. Second, the mechanical parts, such as motors, disc or wheels, make the robot move and become mobile. With this, human robots are capable of performing any given task, similar to that of a human being. Third, sensors help notify the robot about its surroundings, such as space between objects and direction — or, in other instances, knowing when to listen and when to speak.
In reality, a simple, yet complex computer program, motors and sensors are all that it takes to create a functioning robot — how scary is that!
Soon, human robots will become part of one’s everyday life. As mentioned before, human robots will acquire the role of every such thing, removing the pressure from both adults and children. Productivity may increase and convenience is to be expected, but its effects aren’t as pleasing as they may seem. So, what is the influence of humanoid robots?
First, as human robots enter the home and replace a majority of household chores performed by adults and children, responsibilities become limited. Thus, a lack of discipline is presented. Children grow up not being told to do anything and instead, they believe their robot can do it, whether that be chores, homework, etc.
Second, as human robots continue to develop over time, children will often mistaken them for real humans. Soon, robots will be all that kids are familiar with, causing children to assume that every human is a robot — or every robot is a human in that case.
A study testing humanoid robots suggests the concern that some families may already be experiencing. As young children encounter robots within the home, they often misinterpret what is living and nonliving (Kim, Yi, Lee, 2019). This is an incredible concern that negatively affects the parent and child relationship as well.
Finally, as children interact with robots more than their actual parents, they begin to form a stronger bond with the robot than with the parent. One might ask how that is possible, however this seems to be expected as parent roles soon fade. With this, there is a lack of emotional connection, support and shelter between parent and child, causing family behavior and at-home life to be incredibly different.
References
Kim, M., Yi, S., & Lee, D. (2019). Between living and nonliving: Young children’s animals judgements and reasoning about humanoid robots. PLos ONE, 14(6), 1–19.
Lou, S. (Photograph). (2019, July). Domestic robots average selling price worldwide 2015–2025, by category [photograph]. New York, NY: Statista.
McCarthy, N. (2015). How prevalent is smart technology in U.S. homes? Forbes. Retrieved from https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2015/10/06/how-prevalent-is-smart-technology-in-u-s-homes-infographic/#371988d32eef
Pearce, A. J., Adair, B., Miller, K., Ozanne, E., Said, C., Santamaria, N., & Morris, M. E. (2012). Robotics to enable older adults to remain living at home. Journal of Aging Research. doi: 10.1155/2012/538169
The Jakarta Post (2017). Meet Sophia: The first robot declared a citizen by Saudi Arabia [Video file]. Retrieved from https://youtu.be/E8Ox6H64yu8
Yu, Z., Huang, Q., Ma, G., Chen, X., Zhang, W., Li, J., & Gao, J. (2015). Design and development of the humanoid robot BHR-5. Advances in Mechanical Engineering, 6(1), 1–11.
Humanoid Robots: Medical Miracle or Mistake?
A Tetrad Analysis of Robotics in the Medical Field
By: Jessica Nafe
Imagine having a robot check vital signs at a doctors appointment. Imagine talking to a surrogate doctor halfway across the world via a mobile screen. Imagine having a humanoid robot stitch you back up with carefully calculated precision.
Gone are the days of stethoscopes and lollipops. These are the doctors of today.
Humanoid robots are the latest up-and-coming technology sweeping the world, especially since the invention of Sophia, the first robot to be granted citizenship. A lot of thought has gone into their impact on society as a whole, but these mechanical-beings are starting to find a place in the medical field as well, which warrants a serious evaluation.
Will these humanoid robots advance the healthcare system like never before? Or will they lead society down a path to destruction. The answer is a complicated one.
Humanoid robots may be taking over the medical field thanks to advanced technology.
For starters, humanoid robots in the healthcare system causes a lot of number of factors to become obsolete. The value of human reasoning seemed to fade, while the accuracy and efficiency of robots rises. At the Vanderbilt University Medical Center, algorithms have been created that are able to predict suicide rates with 80–90% accuracy. Another algorithm from the university used MRI brain scans to predict the diagnosis of autism in infants with 81% accuracy (Loh, 2018). Through IBM’s AI platform, an analysis of a brain cancer patient complete with a treatment plan was finalized in 10 minutes. Human doctors took 160 hours to make a comparable plan (Loh, 2018).
Although human doctors are able to diagnose patients using transits like intentionality, consciousness, free will, and human reasoning, those characteristics seem obsolete when compared to the efficient results that AI technology can accomplish (Duffy, 2002).
Computer systems that need to be run by human users also seem obsolete in light of the automatic AI technology that is available. Perhaps even traditional medical tools such as thermometers, stethoscopes, and shots will become obsolete as healthcare robots who can independently run routine vital checks (Loh, 2018).
Despite what is pushed to the background, humanoid robots can enhance a lot in the medical field as well. For starters, the efficiency and accuracy they provide — as previously mentioned — is unmatched and could decrease misdiagnosis and allow for more medical successes (Loh, 2018). Humanoid robots also enhance the workplace for medical professionals. Doctors will no longer have to risk obtaining diseases from highly contagious patients, when a robot could make contact in their place. The field of practice of doctors is limitless, as “surrogate robots” have been and can be used to let doctors communicate with patients all over the world, all from the comfort of their own office (Loh, 2018).
Doctors are able to remotely communicate with patients all over the world via surrogate robots and video monitors.
Health care costs may be more affordable than ever, as humanoid robots would decrease the need to pay salaries to doctors. Robots could be the key to affordable health care. However, that benefit cannot be overshadowed by the inevitability of less job security for doctors and nurses.
Evidently, these robots hold a lot of power to make factors obsolete or enhanced, so where does that power come from? How did we even arrive in an era where this technology is available? Humanoid robots retrieve technology from some of the first computers, utilizing tools such as computer chips, algorithms, and microprocessors to accomplish their tasks. Interestingly enough, scientists are working on photonic computer chips that will use light for power, creating machines that could process data at the speed of light (Loh, 2018). Robots derive their technology from automated machine as well, using mechanics and electrical circuits to walk, move, and talk similar to real human beings (Duffy, 2006).
But can they ever be replacements for real human beings? A lot of scientists have doubts. “Human reasoning is the ability to make good decisions with incomplete information,” which is a capability that data-driven algorithms cannot emulate (Duffy, 2002 p.34). Humanoid robots lack the use of cultural pasts, emotional backgrounds, and personal past experiences that real doctors are able to use. Technology simply can’t compete. In the words of Stephen Hawking, “We are still merely scratching the surface of understanding human intelligence.” (Evers, 2018 p.15). Human doctors have the advantage of human survival, their gut intuition that has the ability to save lives (Duffy, 2002). Can we trust humanoid robots over human intuition?
Not only that, but robots can only seem like humans. They will never be human. Some social scientists wonder if the use of robots are “cheating” people (Duffy, 2002). We do not understand human consciousness enough to recreate it (Duffy, 2002). Humanoid robots are built to engage with humans in a familiar and compelling manner. (Duffy, 2006). Making robots look and act like humans makes it possible for people to relate to machines in a deeper way (Evers, 2018). Finding a balance, though, between expectations of social engagement and the reality of robotic capabilities is vital. Seeking empathy, care, and advice from a robot, void of empathy and non-artificial intelligence, could be a dangerous path.
This question must be taken seriously, as there is a lot that humanoid robots will change if pushed to the extreme in the next few years. Interpersonal connection will be flipped on its head if humanoid robots mechanically perform duties in place of human beings — real doctors that can look someone in the eye and hold their hand through a tough diagnosis. Let us not underestimate the power of human touch.
Will robots ever be able to overrule true human connection? This is a question the healthcare system will have to answer sooner or later.
It has been said that the eye tracking systems in humanoid robots allows for relationship building between robots and humans, but where is the true depth and meaning in those mechanic eyes? (Evers, 2018). Human connection cannot be had if one half of the connection is artificially built.
If pushed to the extreme, ethics in the medical field will be challenged like never before. If robotic doctors rely on data to make diagnosis, privacy laws will have to be revised and reworked with extreme care in order to protect the massive amounts of data required for AI systems to function (Loh, 2018).
The use of medical robots will change medical liability as well (Loh, 2018). Will robots be held medically responsible for mistakes? Or perhaps their inventors will be sued for the errors of their creations. If medical robots take over the healthcare system, a whole new can of ethical worms will be opened.
Algorithms and AI technology may allow for unprecedented efficiency and precision in the medical field, but are humanoid robots a justified ends to the means of health? A lot can be gained in regards to accuracy, affordability, and reach, but it is up for debate if those benefits outweigh the power of human connection and human reasoning that only real doctors can bring. Even as robotics continues to advance in the coming years, it is doubtful that technology will ever be able to capture the true depth of heart that doctors provide for their patients.
References
Evers, V. (2018). Of robots and humans. UNESCO. Retrieved from https://en.unesco.org/courier/2018-3/robots-and-humans
Loh, E. (2018). Medicine and the rise of the robots: a qualitative review of recent advances of artificial intelligence in health. BMJ Leader, 2 (59–63). Retrieved from https://bmjleader.bmj.com/content/2/2/59.full
Duffy, B. R. (2002). Anthropomorphism and robotics. The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behaviour, 20. Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.60.297&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Duffy, B. R. (2006). Fundamental issues in social robotics. International Review of Information Ethics, 6(12). Retrieved from http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.111.3293&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Environmental Impact of Humanoid Robotics
By: Jessica Nafe
Tom the farmbot is able to dramatically reduce the use of pesticides and fertilizers, which could ultimately lead to less greenhouse gas emissions.
By the time someone walks out of the iPhone store, it seems their phone is already out of date. Technology develops in the blink of an eye.
In the rapid pursuit for betterment, a quick analysis of environmental impact is essential. After all, this earth is the only one humans have to work with.
Robots are often touted as being efficient, but are they environmentally efficient? As processors in robots can run faster, chips will run into a quantum instability issue which will call for more energy to be utilized in the future (Wright, 2019). In addition, the smaller computer parts that are being used cannot be recycled like previous parts could (Wright, 2019).
On the positive side, it has been found that greenhouse gas emissions can be reduced with the use of robots in occupations such as farming and production, since mechanical machinery can work with unmatched efficiency (Wright, 2019). For example, Small Robot Company in Great Britain has found great success in two “farmbots” that can autonomously plant, feed, and weed crops (Agri-Tech Editors, 2019). Tom Dick and Harry, the robots, can increase yield while reducing chemical usage (Agri-Tech Editors, 2019).
However, as energy efficiency is increased a “rebound effect” will inevitably occur (Right, 2019). The more improved technology gets, the greater our human consumption of said technology is. As robots begin to be a high demand product, more of them will need to be produced to meet the demand, which means more energy consumption (Wright, 2019).
Like nearly anything in life, there seems to be a pro for every con in regards to robotics. The lesson to be learned here is that robots are not the end-all-be-all of climate change. They may be more efficient, but their environmental impact still exists and should be approached with great care as technology continues to rapidly advance.
References
Agri-Tech Editors. (2019, January 2). Small robot company. Achieves Crowdcube success within minutes. Agri-Tech East. Retrieved from https://www.agritech-east.co.uk/small-robot-company-achieves-crowdcube-success/
Wright, L. (2019, October 3). Automation and robotics could have a surprising impact on climate crisis. World Economic Forum. Retrieved from https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2019/10/robots-take-our-jobs-climate-change/
Sunny with a Chance of Invasion
Forecasted Effects of Humanoid Robots
By: Allie Arkell
Technology impacts society because technology is a powerful source. While technology has power, humans also have autonomy. The power of technology is measured up against the power of human autonomy Technological determinism is the idea that technology has greater power than humans have; social construction is the idea that humans have greater power than technology has. How much do humans construct the impact of technology and how much does technology construct the impact of humans? This is the debate that surfaces every time a new form of technology is introduced. The current technological medium that is up for debate has to do with artificial intelligence. Siri and Alexa are two modern forms of artificial intelligence that have been embraced in some homes while feared in others. Another modern example of artificial intelligence is self-checkout machines in grocery stores. The implementation of humanoids, or human-like robots, may be the future of technology. However, with the emergence of every new technological medium comes consequences. Do the pros outweigh the cons in the adoption of humanoids? There is no question that society would be greatly impacted by the implementation of human robots; the world would operate differently with this new technology. There is importance in evaluating the potential outcomes of a world where humans and humanoids collide. There are two specific aspects of humanoids to consider prior to thinking about adoption: The practical purposes of robots and interpersonal communication with robots.
Implementing humanoids into society should not merely occur because today’s technology provides that possibility; rather, there must be practical reasoning as to why robots would benefit to society. According to Postman, there is a disadvantage to every advantage. These advantages and disadvantages need to be equally evaluated in order to evaluate the adoption of humanoids. There are two main types of human robots that have practical implications: humanoids meant for utilitarian purposes and humanoids meant to provide emotional support (Zhao, 2006). Humanoid service robots, or HSR, are the utilitarian robots designed to be incorporated into the service industry. HSR are meant to be found in food services, retail, hospitality, and health care (Mende, Scott, Van Doorn, Grewal, & Shanks, 2019).
Looking specifically at the example of self-checkout human service robots, the pros and cons must be weighed. There are practical implications of introducing these robots into society, for these humanoids would reduce — or even eliminate — human employees, increase efficiency, and provide a sense of personability. Because of the implementation of HSR, there may come a time when humans would no longer need to work since robots would get the job done faster. Personability is a relevant factor in HSR future potential because current self-checkout machines lack the human-like interactive experience; HSR have the capacity to provide human-like meaningful engagement (Mende, et al., 2019). However, adopting this type of robot would decrease job opportunities, lessen human interaction, and feed into already shortened attention spans. With modern technology, humans are already becoming lazy and their attention spans are decreasing. Robots would encourage these negative changes because they would take away jobs (where people learn work ethic) and ‘fix’ the impatience problem by completely eliminating the need for this important virtue. Ultimately, HSR would do more harm than good in the context of the service industry.
The second type of human robot with practical implications is the humanoid intended to provide emotional support. Emotional support robots are meant to provide comfort to lonely individuals. While these robots may elicit a sense of companionship, humans will find themselves disconnected to the real world as a result of false fellowship. Emotional support humanoids are a dangerous concept due to their human-like features. According to research, the human-like appearance of humanoids raises expectations about the robot’s abilities (Székely, Powell, Vannucci, Rea, Sciutti, & Michael, 2019). Because the robots look like human beings, owners would be prone to treat their robots as such. Treating robots like humans becomes dangerous because robots do not have authentic emotions like humans do — even if they are programmed to ‘feel’. The reality is that humanoids are a type of technology that undergo technological errors just like computers or cellphones. Humans share a social need for connection, and this need can only be satisfied by real life humans. If robots were to take over the emotional support jobs of humans, a lot of frustration would likely emerge as a result of dissatisfaction with false emotional support; true emotional support can only be provided by human beings.
If humanoids were to be adopted by society, life would become a synthetic society where humans and humanoids are intermixed (Zhao, 2006). Because humans and humanoids alike would interact with each other on a daily basis, interpersonal communication is an important aspect to consider. Human service robots (HSR) are the most likely robots to be adopted first; evaluating what interpersonal communication would look like with HSR is necessary when considering adoption. Research shows that consumers would rather respond to a less human-like HSR than a realistic one, for humans find overly human-like human service robots to be eerie. Additionally, humans tend to feel as though realistic humanoids interfere with human identity (Mende, et al., 2019). If HSR are to be introduced, they should be designed in a way that their look is not too human-like. Interpersonal communication would then remain separate from human life to robot life. When humanoids look or act overly human-like, the ability to differentiate between talking to a robot and talking to a human weakens. Expectations would become too high for robots and too low for humans if humanoids and humans collided. Research shows that verbal communication on the robot’s end can help establish appropriate expectations about a robot’s capabilities (Székely, et al., 2019). If humanoids are adopted, clear boundaries need to be implemented so that humans do not expect that robots fulfill their social needs in place of other humans. To maintain human autonomy, robots should never be disguised as humans. Authentic human interaction is incredibly significant and cannot be replaced by technology.
According to both research and evaluation, humanoids are not recommended due to their negative societal effects. If humanoids are adopted, it is important that every possible impact is considered. Artificial intelligence is an up and coming reality, but there is wisdom in cautiously taking the necessary steps to maintain human autonomy. For practical purposes, robots should not take on too much of a human resemblance physically or emotionally — even if modern technology allows that possibility. Both ethically and emotionally speaking, humans need to stay separate from machines. Maintaining authentic human interactions requires that there are clear boundaries within the interpersonal communication context of interacting with humanoids. Critical theory is, well, critical because the theory emphasizes the value in keeping human agency and combating the negative effects of technology. Technology does have power, but humans have greater power than technology. With each new technology, human beings have continually maintained their autonomy; time after time, humans have won the fight against technological determinism. Not even humanoids will take away human autonomy.
References
Mende, M., Scott, M., Van Doorn, J., Grewal, D., & Shanks, I. (2019). Service robots rising: How humanoid robots influence service experiences and elicit compensatory consumer responses. Journal of Marketing Research (JMR), 56(4), 535 — 556. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.bethel.edu/10.1177/0022243718822827
Zhao, S. (2006). Humanoid social robots as a medium of communication. New Media & Society, 8(3), 401 — 419. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.bethel.edu/10.1177/1461444806061951
Székely, M., Powell, H., Vannucci, F., Rea, F., Sciutti, A., & Michael, J. (2019). The perception of a robot partner’s effort elicits a sense of commitment to human-robot interaction. Interaction Studies, 20(2), 234 — 255. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.bethel.edu/10.1075/is.18001.sze
