Robots That Learn to Fear Like Humans Survive Better

Robots That Learn to Fear Like Humans Survive Better


This article is part of our exclusive IEEE Journal Watch series in partnership with IEEE Xplore.

Imagine walking downtown when you hear a loud bang coming from the construction site across the street—you may have the impulse to freeze or even duck down. This type of quick, instinctual reaction is one of the most basic but important evolutionary processes we have to protect ourselves and survive in unfamiliar settings.

Now, researchers are beginning to explore how a similar, fast-reacting thought process can be translated into robots. The idea is to program robots to make decisions the same way that humans do, based on our innate emotional responses to unknown stimuli—and in particular our fear response. The results, published 27 June in IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, show that the approach can significantly enhance robots’ ability to assess risk and avoid dangerous situations.

Alessandro Rizzo, an associate professor in automation engineering and robotics at the Polytechnic University of Turin in Italy, led the study. He notes that robots currently face many challenges in adapting to dynamic environments while enacting self-preserving strategies. This is in large part because their control systems are often designed to accomplish very specific tasks. “As a result, robots may struggle to operate effectively in complex and changing conditions,” Rizzo says.

How the Human Brain Responds to Risk

Humans, on the other hand, are able to respond to many different and unique stimuli that we encounter. It’s theorized that our brains have two different ways to calculate, assess, and respond to risk in these scenarios.

The first involves a very innate response where we detect external stimuli (for example, a loud bang from a construction site) and our brains make very quick, emotional decisions (such as to freeze or duck). In a way, our brains are swiftly responding to raw data in these scenarios, rather than taking the time to more thoroughly process it.

According to a theory on how our brains work, called the dual-pathway hypothesis, this reaction is elicited by the “low road,” neural circuitry responsible for emotions, driven by the amygdala. But when our brains instead use experience and more articulated reasoning involving our prefrontal cortex, this is the second, “high road” pathway to respond to stimuli.

Rizzo and a doctoral candidate in his lab, Andrea Usai, were curious to see how these two different approaches for confronting risky situations would play out in robots that have to navigate unfamiliar environments. They began by designing a control system for robots that emulates a fear response via the low road.

“We focused on fear, as it is one of the most studied emotions in neuroscience and, in our view, the one with the greatest potential for robotics,” says Usai. “Fear is closely related to self-preservation and rapid responses to danger, both of which are critical for adaptive behavior.”

Reinforced Learning in Robotics

To emulate the fear response in their robot, the researchers designed a controller based on reinforced learning, which helps the robot dynamically adjust its priorities and constraints in real time based on raw data of its surroundings. These results inform the behavior of a second algorithm called a nonlinear model predictive controller, which sets a corresponding motor pattern to the robot’s locomotion.

Through simulations, Rizzo and Usai tested how their robot navigates unfamiliar environments, comparing it to other robot control systems without the fear element. The simulations involved different scenarios, with various dangerous and nondangerous obstacles, which are either static or moving around the simulated environment.

The results show that the robot with the low-road programming was able to navigate a smoother and safer path toward its goal compared to conventional robot designs. For example, in one of the scenarios with hazards dynamically moving around, the low-road robot navigated around dangerous objects with a wider berth of about 3.1 meters, whereas the other two conventional robots tested in this study came within a harrowing 0.3 and 0.8 meters of dangerous objects.

Usai says there are many different scenarios where this low-road approach to robotics could be useful, including cases of object manipulation, surveillance, and rescue operations, where robots must deal with hazardous conditions and may need to adopt more cautious behavior.

But as Usai notes, the low-road approach is very reactive in nature and is better suited for very quick decisions that are needed in the short term. Therefore, the research team is working on a control design that mimics the high road that, while complementing the low road, could help robots make more rational, long-term decisions.

The researchers are considering doing this using multimodal large language models, like ChatGPT. As Rizzo explains, “These models could help simulate some of the core functions of the human prefrontal cortex, such as decision-making, strategic planning, and context evaluation, allowing us to emulate more cognitively driven responses in robots.”

“Looking ahead, it would also be interesting trying to extend the architecture to incorporate multiple emotions,” Rizzo adds, “enabling a richer and more nuanced form of adaptive behavior in robotic systems.”

发布者:Michelle Hampson,转转请注明出处:https://robotalks.cn/robots-that-learn-to-fear-like-humans-survive-better/

(0)
上一篇 19 8 月, 2025 2:18 上午
下一篇 19 8 月, 2025 2:19 上午

相关推荐

  • Podcast | An Urgent Call for a Domestically Sourced Biomanufacturing Supply Chain

    The united state can not have a lively “bio-based” production market without a just as solid resource of residential products to sustain it.

    26 7 月, 2024
    005
  • 2024 Research Report | Vietnam's Loyalty Program Market Anticipated to Reach US$1.54 Billion by 2028 – Technology and Personalization at the Core of Evolving Market – ResearchAndMarkets.com

    DUBLIN–( ORGANIZATION CABLE)– The “Vietnam Commitment Programs Market Knowledge and Future Development Characteristics Databook – 50+ KPIs on Commitment Pro…

    All posts 4 12 月, 2024
    002
  • AW-Lake Names Long-Term Employee Chris Husson as General Manager

    AW-Lake, circulation instrumentation maker, has actually called Chris Husson basic supervisor.

    14 8 月, 2024
    004
  • Superconductivity study confirms existence of edge supercurrents

    Topological products are products that have uncommon residential or commercial properties that occur due to the fact that their wavefunction– the physical legislation directi…

    26 8 月, 2024
    003
  • 人形机器人,应该要“脸”吗?-钛媒体官方网站

    文 | 产业象限,作者 | 钱江,编辑 | 山茶 脸有什么用吗? 在我们的社会中,“脸”几乎是人与人之间互相识别的第一标签。 但除此之外,“脸”在我们生活中还承担着一些其他意义:比如刷脸支付,脸会是我们确认支付的许可;比如门禁识别,脸是我们在许多地方畅通无阻的保证。 甚至许多时候我们会气愤地质问别人,你要脸吗?这个这个时候,脸还会包含尊严、道德、责任等许多无形的价值观念。 显而易见,脸几乎是作为的人最重要的特征。以至于当元宇宙热潮来临,人们需要从一个世界进入一个世界时,要做的第一件事,也是给自己捏一张“脸”。 但一个有意思的现象是,在人形机器人蓬勃发展的当下,这个致力于模仿人类形象的事物,却几乎从来没有被认真讨论过它的脸应该长成什么样。 人形机器人不需要脸吗?还是说当前的技术条件,这个话题还不应该被讨论?如果一定要给机器人一张脸的话,这张脸又应该怎么做? 机器人不要“脸”, 人才要“脸” 人形机器人要不要脸,答案是显而易见的。 回顾记忆中那些令人印象深刻的机器人,无论是《变形金刚》里的大黄蜂、擎天柱,还是鸟山明笔下的阿拉蕾,亦或是独自在地球上捡垃圾的瓦力,几乎都有一张生动而鲜明的脸。 但最早的时候,人形机器人要“脸”这件事情是被忽略的。 波士顿动力前CEO Marc Raibert早期就认为,人形机器人“功能就是一切”,“能力、灵巧、感知和智力才是机器人的关键功能,其它的都不重要”。 所以在2024年电动版Atlas发布之前,波士顿动力的机器人几乎都没有明显的脸部特征。 Marc Raibert转变理念是在2021年,波士顿动力液压版Atlas的一则互动视频“Set You Be pleased Me”在网上出圈。这让Marc Raibert意识到,形态的美感可以对机器人的仿生动作带来加成效果,而脸部是形态美最重要的一个特征。 同样是在2021年,这一理念被另一家机器人公司所印证。 这一年,英国机器人制造商Engineered Arts发布了一款名叫Ameca的人形机器人并且迅速出圈,原因就是因为Ameca拥有逼真的面部表情。 与Marc Raibert不同,Ameca的创造者Will Jackson认为:“人脸是我们拥有的具有最高带宽的通信工具”,一个表情所能传达的信息要远多于声音和肢体。 而Ameca的出圈,也侧面证明了大众其实更喜爱一个表情丰富、有温度、会表达情感的伙伴,而不是一个空有力气的铁疙瘩。 2009年的一部科幻电影《Moon》也在讲述一个同样的故事。 电影中,男主Sam Bell常常向他的机器人工作伙伴Gerty倾诉心声,Gerty总能一边回答一边给出动画表情来对Sam的遭遇表示同情。 Gerty的本质是一串计算机符号,而这张脸将冰冷的数学运算幻化抽象为平易近人的表情,不仅在言语上安慰了Sam,更是通过视觉交流拉近了人机关系。 ▲图源:《Moon》电影 显而易见,与机器人相比,人类其实更需要机器人拥有一张脸。只是如何去实现这张脸,目前行业里还没有一个统一的答案。 目前,主流机器人公司在设计面部时主要采用两种策略: 一种是基于集体文化共识,选择中立和抽象的图像,通过符号化的情感传达来满足人类对情感表达的基本需求,以捕捉和传递情感的本质。 另一种则是追求极致的逼真度,努力再现人类面部的细节,试图通过接近现实的人类面貌来实现更深层次的情感共鸣和互动。 但这两种方案的落地,却都面临许多挑战。 人形机器人,让脸谱符号化 现实中,一款合格的人形机器人,头部需要具备耐用性、抗冲击能力,以适应多样化的操作环境和任务。 因此,包括特斯拉的擎天柱、Figure01、波士顿动力的Atlas等人形机器人在内,其头部使用的基本是金属合金和高强度塑料。 而在这样一个“硬邦邦”的头部,安装一张灵动、表情自然的脸并不容易。 所以当前主流的人形机器人并没有对面部表情做精致的研究设计,而是采用类似Gerty这种抽象的“动画脸”或“卡通脸”。毕竟这样的脸庞几乎能被所有种族的人接受,并且更容易构建。 ▲图:主流人形机器人面部设计 产业象限制图 「产业象限」梳理了目前几家主流的人形机器人的脸部形象,可以看到它们面部清一色地使用“头盔式”的“玻璃面罩”,面罩里内置摄像头或使用LED灯带镶边。 比如,仔细观察智元机器人,会发现它在操作矿泉水瓶的时候,表情是微笑的:

发表回复

您的邮箱地址不会被公开。 必填项已用 * 标注

联系我们

400-800-8888

在线咨询: QQ交谈

邮件:admin@example.com

工作时间:周一至周五,9:30-18:30,节假日休息

关注微信
社群的价值在于通过分享与互动,让想法产生更多想法,创新激发更多创新。