To Be Human, or Not To Be Human, that is the question

When it comes down to it, Lewis the robot isn't much more than a red trash can on wheels. And its designer, Washington University computer scientist William Smart, likes it that way.

"I don't want to put fuzzy heads on my robots," he said. "It's a tool. You don't have an emotional relationship with a robot."

Whether or not the relationships are emotional, robots are certainly becoming more social. Especially in Japan, where robots are doing everything from collecting garbage to bathing the elderly to providing child care. Lewis, a picture-taking robot, also has a social role — to linger on the edges of gatherings and catch people in candid poses.

As these social robots lurch their way into our lives, a question arises: What should they look like? Some scientists say they should look and talk like people, and take advantage of people's tendencies to personify. (Think C3PO.) Others, such as Smart, say they should remain fundamentally nonhuman — intelligent and capable of reading people, but not obviously anthropomorphic. (Think R2D2.)

"It's definitely a design decision, and it's one that doesn't have an obvious answer," said Brian Scassellati, a Yale University computer scientist.

Ever since the first humans looked up, seeing faces in the clouds and a man in the moon, people have been personifying — or anthropomorphizing — nonhuman objects.

That holds for technology, too — especially robots with human characteristics.

Daily interactions with robots are still a long way off, especially in the United States, which, to a certain extent, has sided with Smart's design ethos. Successful robots in the U.S., such as Roomba the vacuum cleaner, tend to be machine-like and utilitarian.

Until recently, the idea of a perfectly humanoid robot was restricted to the realm of George Lucas and Philip K. Dick. The Terminator appeared on movie screens long before engineers could make something so lifelike.

But recent advances in voice recognition, programming and stretchable silicone skin mean the time has come to revisit a 37-year-old theory.

It was in 1970 that a Japanese roboticist, Masahiro Mori, first posited the notion of the "uncanny valley." The theory is simple: The more human or mammalian a robot is, the more people find it pleasing. Robot puppies are more familiar than a robotic arm that works in an auto factory, wielding a welding torch.

But if a robot gets too close to a human likeness without quite achieving it, then people sense that something is a bit awry. Think of zombies or the eerie androids of "Blade Runner." That's the uncanny valley.

Karl MacDorman, a roboticist at Indiana University, worked in Japan on the Actroid Repliees, a series of social robots so lifelike that they might lie on the other side of the uncanny valley. The robots can respond to touch and carry on conversations.

But MacDorman said the engineers were careful never to show the android in a state of partial disassembly. Exposed wires would have ruined the effect and dropped the robot into the uncanny valley.

Smart wants to keep Lewis far away from the uncanny valley.

"I don't want to have a face," he said. "But I want to take advantage of what's wired into us."

Smart incorporates other nonhuman qualities that help Lewis fade into the background. For instance, Lewis moves and turns slowly and deliberately. Humans tend to strike out, suddenly, in a new direction.

He envisions other uses for unobtrusive robots — surveillance, for instance. "Wal-Mart greeters — they make it statistically less likely for you to shoplift. Could a robot do that?" Yes, he says, but only if it's the sort of robot that doesn't arouse hysterical enthusiasm.

Other researchers, such as Cynthia Breazeal at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, are deliberately incorporating human features to take advantage of our inbred responses. For example, Kismet, a recent MIT robot, looks like a Sesame Street character with its big eyes, ears and eyebrows. It mimics the basic facial expressions of people to convey anger, surprise or disappointment. That encourages people to personify the robot.

"Bill's idea is distinctive in that he's trying to get away from these more specific mammalian expressions and use much lower-level cues about mental states," said Philip Robbins, a Washington University philosopher who is helping Smart with the theoretical underpinnings of the way robots read people's minds and vice versa.

But there can be very good reasons to play up the personification. One idea that Scassellati is working on is to see if a sociable robot could be good at diagnosing and treating children with disabilities like autism.

The diagnosis of autism is difficult because of its subjectivity. Where therapists differ in the tone and order of their diagnostic questions, a robot can be perfectly consistent. And treatment requires even more patience and consistency. With no lack of enthusiasm, a humanoid robot could focus on one autistic behavior and work toward incremental change.

While there still seems to be a resistance to making robots appear too human in the U.S., the culture is different in Japan. Robots are about communication, not utility, MacDorman said. Robotic guides are becoming popular, since the Japanese are reluctant to trouble other people for help, MacDorman said.

"They'd much rather ask for help from a robot," he said.

That was from an article posted by STL Today, you can read the original article here.
http://www.stltoday.com/stltoday/news/stories.nsf/sciencemedicine/story/...

I think that differences between the East and West are very interesting, and worth exploring in more detail.