Article View: comp.robotics
Article #111Re: Biological Plausibility (was Re: 6 legged beast)
From: Mark W. Tilden
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1992 19:43
Date: Tue, 04 Aug 1992 19:43
45 lines
2956 bytes
2956 bytes
In article <51292@dime.cs.umass.edu> connolly@rabbit.cs.umass.edu (Christopher Ian Connolly) writes:
>In article <1992Jul31.232606.5964@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu>,
>rwmurphr@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Robert W Murphree) writes:
>
>>Bug behavior is simple enough that it seems to be
>>simulatable by modern control theory and computer hardware.
>
>Without a clear view of the neural substrates of insect behavior, what
>are you really simulating? The most you can say is "See, my robot
>acts a bit like a cockroach." -- not a very impressive statement. My
>opinion is that before one can say things like "robotic insect", one
>is obligated to provide some sort of clear model which explains *why*
>the thing should be regarded as insect-like.
"Why" an insect robot should be regarded as insect-like does not have to
do with how much it looks like an insect in operation, but rather if
it shows, if not the same survival strategy as an insect, an adequate
survival ability. By "survival" I don't mean, "can it withstand attacks
by leopards", but "can it negotiate and traverse complex terrains without
getting trapped". That's not to say surviving leopards is unimportant,
but one thing at a time, if you please.
Mimicing bug gaits may be interesting, but it is by no means an complete
end to producing adequate machines that can survive. Currently, we
cannot can even approach the power/materials/weight aspects of insectoid
morphology. Therefore, the question is not so much "how do we copy an
insects nervous system", but "can and how do we adapt observed insect
nervous system structures to the brand of metal bugs we're creating".
We steal bug strategies for two reasons: they're available and sufficient
for the task, and they seem to exhibit sufficiently simple behavior that
we vainly believe we can figure them out.
Point is: anthropormorphic designs may be valid for Ma Nature and computer
simulations, but don't expect them to work well for real-world robots.
Severe redesign is necessary to make metal behave like bone (or exoskeleton).
Is all.
--
Mark Tilden: _-_-_-__--__--_ /(glitch!) M.F.C.F Hardware Design Lab.
-_-___ | \ /\/ U of Waterloo. Ont. Can, N2L-3G1
|__-_-_-| \/ (519)885-1211 ext. 2454
"MY OPINIONS, YOU HEAR!? MINE! MINE! MINE! MINE! MINE! AH HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!"
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<BsH5G2.I6t@math.uwaterloo.ca>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!utcsri!torn!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!watmath!mwtildenReferences:
<51096@dime.cs.umass.edu> <1992Jul31.232606.5964@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> <51292@dime.cs.umass.edu>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Newsgroups: comp.robotics Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!utcsri!torn!watserv2.uwaterloo.ca!watmath!mwtilden From: mwtilden@math.uwaterloo.ca (Mark W. Tilden) Subject: Re: Biological Plausibility (was Re: 6 legged beast) Message-ID: <BsH5G2.I6t@math.uwaterloo.ca> Keywords: mammals, brains, robots, ganglia, twitch, overthruster Organization: University of Waterloo References: <51096@dime.cs.umass.edu> <1992Jul31.232606.5964@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> <51292@dime.cs.umass.edu> Date: Tue, 4 Aug 1992 19:43:14 GMT Lines: 45