Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
General AI Discussion / Re: A.eye
« Last post by yotamarker on March 27, 2017, 04:41:27 PM »
12
AI News / Re: Most Human Like Android Built to Date
« Last post by Art on March 27, 2017, 02:01:06 PM »
Nice vid. Yes, funny, cute and also informative.
13
Robotics News / Envisioning the future of robotics
« Last post by Tyler on March 27, 2017, 10:48:32 AM »
Envisioning the future of robotics
16 March 2017, 10:07 am

Image: Ryan Etter Robotics is said to be the next technological revolution. Many seem to agree that robots will have a tremendous impact over the following years, and some are heavily betting on it. Companies are investing billions buying other companies, and public authorities are discussing legal frameworks to enable a coherent growth of robotics.

Understanding where the field of robotics is heading is more than mere guesswork. While much public concern focuses on the potential societal issues that will arise with the advent of robots, in this article, we present a review of some of the most relevant milestones that happened in robotics over the last decades. We also offer our insights on feasible technologies we might expect in the near future.

Copyright © Acutronic Robotics 2017. All Rights Reserved.  Pre-robots and first manipulators

What’s the origin of robots? To figure it out we’ll need to go back quite a few decades to when different conflicts motivated the technological growth that eventually enabled companies to build the first digitally controlled mechanical arms. One of the first and well documented robots was UNIMATE (considered by many the first industrial robot): a programmable machine funded by General Motors, used to create a production line with only robots. UNIMATE helped improve industrial production at the time. This motivated other companies and research centers to actively dedicate resources to robotics, which boosted growth in the field.



Sensorized robots

Sensors were not typically included in robots until the 70’s. Starting in1968, a second generation of robots emerged that integrated sensors. These robots were able to react to their environment and offer responses that met varying scenarios.

Relevant investments were observed during this period. Industrial players worldwide were attracted by the advantage that robots promised.



Worldwide industrial robots:  Era of the robots

Many consider that the Era of Robots started in 1980. Billions of dollars were invested by companies all around to world to automate basic tasks in their assembly lines. Sales of industrial robots grew 80% above the previous years’.

Key technologies appeared within these years: General internet access was extended in 1980; Ethernet became a standard in 1983 (IEEE 802.3); the Linux kernel was announced in 1991; and soon after that real-time patches started appearing on top of Linux.

The robots created between 1980 and 1999 belong to what we call the third generation of robots: robots that were re-programmable and included dedicated controllers. Robots populated many industrial sectors and were used for a wide variety of activities: painting, soldering, moving, assembling, etc.

By the end of the 90s, companies started thinking about robots beyond the industrial sphere. Several companies created promising concepts that would inspire future roboticists. Among the robots created within this period, we highlight two:

  • The first LEGO Mindstorms kit (1998): a set consisting of 717 pieces including LEGO bricks, motors, gears, different sensors, and a RCX Brick with an embedded microprocessor to construct various robots using the exact same parts. The kit allowed the learning of  basic robotics principles. Creative projects have appeared over the years showing the potential of interchangeable hardware in robotics. Within a few years. the LEGO Mindstorms kit became the most successful project that involved robot part interchangeability.
  • Sony’s AIBO (1999): the world’s first entertainment robot. Widely used for research and development, Sony offered robotics to everyone in the form of a $1,500 robot that included a distributed hardware and software architecture. The OPEN-R architecture involved the use of modular hardware components — e.g. appendages that can be easily removed and replaced to customize the shape and function of the robots — and modular software components that could be interchanged to modify their behavior and movement patterns. OPEN-R inspired future robotic frameworks, and minimized the need for programming individual movements or responses.
Integration effort was identified as one of the main issues within robotics, particularly related to industrial robots. A common infrastructure typically reduces the integration effort by facilitating an environment in which components can be connected and made to interoperate. Each of the infrastructure-supported components are optimized for such integration at their conception, and the infrastructure handles the integration effort. At that point, components could come from different manufacturers (yet when supported by a common infrastructure, they will interoperate).

Sony’s AIBO and LEGO’s Mindstorms kit were built upon this principle, and both represented common infrastructures. Even though they came from the consumer side of robotics, one could argue that their success was strongly related to the fact that both products made use of interchangeable hardware and software modules. The use of a common infrastructure proved to be one of the key advantages of these technologies, however those concepts were never translated to industrial environments. Instead, each manufacturer, in an attempt to dominate the market, started creating their own “robot programming languages”.

The dawn of smart robots

Starting from the year 2000, we observed a new generation of robot technologies. The so-called fourth generation of robots consisted of more intelligent robots that included advanced computers to reason and learn (to some extend at least), and more sophisticated sensors that helped controllers adapt themselves more effectively to different circumstances.

Among the technologies that appeared in this period, we highlight the Player Project (2000, formerly the Player/Stage Project), the Gazebo simulator (2004) and the Robot Operating System (2007). Moreover, relevant hardware platforms appeared during these years. Single Board Computers (SBCs), like the Raspberry Pi, enabled millions of users all around the world to create robots easily.



The boost of bio-inspired artificial intelligence

The increasing popularity of artificial intelligence, and particularly neural networks, became relevant in this period as well. While a lot of the important work on neural networks happened in the 80’s and in the 90’s, computers did not have enough computational power at the time. Datasets weren’t big enough to be useful in practical applications. As a result, neural networks practically disappeared in the first decade of the 21st century. However, starting from 2009 (speech recognition), neural networks gained popularity and started delivering good results in fields such as computer vision (2012) or machine translation (2014). Over the last few years, we’ve seen how these techniques have been translated to robotics for tasks such as robotic grasping. In the coming years, we expect to see these AI techniques having more and more impact in robotics.

What happened to industrial robots?

Relevant key technologies have also emerged from the industrial robotics landscape (e.g.: EtherCAT). However, except for the appearance of the first so-called collaborative robots, the progress within the field of industrial robotics has significantly slowed down when compared to previous decades. Several groups have identified this fact and written about it with conflicting opinions. Below, we summarize some of the most relevant points encountered while reviewing previous work:

  • The Industrial robot industry :  is it only a supplier industry?

    For some, the industrial robot industry is a supplier industry. It supplies components and systems to larger industries, like manufacturing. These groups argue that the manufacturing industry is dominated by the PLC, motion control and communication suppliers which, together with the big customers, are setting the standards. Industrial robots therefore need to adapt and speak factory languages (PROFINET, ETHERCAT, Modbus TCP, Ethernet/IP, CANOPEN, DEVICENET, etc.) which for each factory, might be different.
  • Lack of collaboration and standardized interfaces in industry

    To date, each industrial robot manufacturer’s business model is somehow about locking you into their system and controllers. Typically, one will encounter the following facts when working with an industrial robot: a) each robot company has its own proprietary programming language, b) programs can’t be ported from one robot company to the next one, c) communication protocols are different, d) logical, mechanical and electrical interfaces are not standardized across the industry. As a result, most robotic peripheral makers suffer from having to support many different protocols, which requires a lot of development time that reduces the functionality of the product.
  • Competing by obscuring vs opening new markets?

    The closed attitude of most industrial robot companies is typically justified by the existing competition. Such an attitude leads to a lack of understanding between different manufacturers. An interesting approach would be to have manufacturers agree on a common infrastructure. Such an infrastructure could define a set of electrical and logical interfaces (leaving the mechanical ones aside due to the variability of robots in different industries) that would allow industrial robot companies to produce robots and components that could interoperate, be exchanged and eventually enter into new markets. This would also lead to a competitive environment where manufacturers would need to demonstrate features, rather than the typical obscured environment where only some are allowed to participate.
 The Hardware Robot Operating System (H-ROS)

For robots to enter new and different fields, it seems reasonable that they need to adapt to the environment itself. This fact was previously highlighted for the industrial robotics case, where robots had to be fluent with factory languages. One could argue the same for service robots (e.g. households robots that will need to adapt to dish washers, washing machines, media servers, etc.), medical robots and many other areas of robotics. Such reasoning lead to the creation of the Hardware Robot Operating System (H-ROS), a vendor-agnostic hardware and software infrastructure for the creation of robot components that interoperate and can be exchanged between robots. H-ROS builds on top of ROS, which is used to define a set of standardized logical interfaces that each physical robot component must meet if compliant with H-ROS.

H-ROS facilitates a fast way of building robots, choosing the best component for each use-case from a common robot marketplace. It complies with different environments (industrial, professional, medical, …) where variables such as time constraints are critical. Building or extending robots is simplified to the point of placing H-ROS compliant components together. The user simply needs to program the cognition part (i.e. brain) of the robot and develop their own use-cases, all without facing the complexity of integrating different technologies and hardware interfaces.

The future ahead

With latest AI results being translated to robotics, and recent investments in the field, there’s a high anticipation for the near future of robotics.

As nicely introduced by Melonee Wise in a recent interview, there’s still not that many things you can do with a $1000-5000 BOM robot (which is what most people would pay on an individual basis for a robot). Hardware is still a limiting factor, and our team strongly believes that a common infrastructure, such as H-ROS, will facilitate an environment where robot hardware and software can evolve.

The list presented below summarizes, according to our judgement, some of the most technically feasible future robotic technologies to appear.



Acknowledgments

This review was funded and supported by Acutronic Robotics, a firm focused on the development of next-generation robot solutions for a range of clients.

The authors would also like to thank the Erle Robotics and the Acutronic groups for their support and help.

References

  • [1] Gates, B. ”A robot in every home,” Scientific American, 296(1), 2007, pp. 58–65. (link)
  • [2] Trikha, B. “ A Journey from floppy disk to cloud storage,” in International Journal on Computer Science and Engineering,Vol. 2, 2010, pp.1449–1452. (link)
  • [3] Copeland, B. J. “Colossus: its origins and originators,” in IEEE Annals of the History of Computing, Vol. 26, 2004, pp. 38–45. (link)
  • [4] Bondyopadhyay, P. K. “In the beginning [junction transistor],” in Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 86, 1998, pp.63–77. (link)
  • [5] Bryson, A. E. “Optimal control-1950 to 1985,” in IEEE Control Systems, Vol. 16, 1996, pp.26–33. (link)
  • [6] Middleditch, A. E. “Survey of numerical controller technology,” in Production Automation Project, University of Rochester, 1973. (link)
  • [7] Acal, A. P., & Lobera, A. S. “Virtual reality simulation applied to a numerical control milling machine,” in International Journal on Interactive Design and Manufacturing, Vol.1, 2007, pp.143–154. (link)
  • [8] Mark, M. “U.S. Patent №2,901,927,” Washington DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 1959 (link)
  • [9] Mickle, P. “A peep into the automated future,” in The capital century 1900–1999. http://www. capitalcentury. com/1961. html, 1961. (link)
  • [10] Kilby, J. S. (1976). Invention of the integrated circuit. IEEE Transactions on electron devices, 23(7), 648–654. (link)
  • [11] Giralt, G., Chatila, R., & Vaisset, M. “An integrated navigation and motion control system for autonomous multisensory mobile robots,” in Autonomous robot vehicles, 1990, pp.420–443. (link)
  • [12] Bryan, L. A., & Bryan, E. A. “Programmable controllers,” 1988. (link)
  • [13] Wade, J. “Dynamics of organizational communities and technological bandwagons: An empirical investigation of community evolution in the microprocessor market,” in Strategic Management Journal, Vol.16, 1995, pp.111–133. (link)
  • [14] Wallén, J. “The history of the industrial robot,” in Linköping University Electronic Press, 2008. (link)
  • [15] Paul, R. P., “WAVE: A Model Based Language for Manipulator Control,” in The Industrial Robot, Vol. 4, 1977, pp.10–17. (link)
  • [16] Shepherd, S., & Buchstab, A. “Kuka robots on-site,” in Robotic Fabrication in Architecture, Art and Design 2014, 2014, pp. 373–380. (link)
  • [17] Cutkosky, M. R., & Wright, P. K. (1982). Position Sensing Wrists for Industrial Manipulators (No. CMU-RI-TR-82–9). CARNEGIE-MELLON UNIV PITTSBURGH PA ROBOTICS INST. (link)
  • [18] Finkel, R., Taylor, R., Bolles, Paul, R. and Feldman, J., “An Overview of AL, A Programming System for Automation,” in Proceedings -Fourth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, June 1975, pp.758–765. (link)
  • [19] Park, J., & Kim, G. J. “Robots with projectors: an alternative to anthropomorphic HRI,” in Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human robot interaction, March 2009, pp. 221–222 (link)
  • [20] Srihari, K., & Deisenroth, M. P. (1988). Robot Programming Languages — A State of the Art Survey. In Robotics and Factories of the Future’87 (pp. 625–635). Springer Berlin Heidelberg. (link)
  • [21] Gruver, W. A., Soroka, B. J., Craig, J. J. and Turner, T. L., “Industrial Robot Programming Languages: A Comparative Evaluation,” in IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Vol. SMC-14, №4, July/August 1984, pp. 565–570. (link)
  • [22] Maeda, J. (2005). Current research and development and approach to future automated construction in Japan. In Construction Research Congress 2005: Broadening Perspectives (pp. 1–11). (link)
  • [23] Castells, M. “The Internet galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, business, and society,” in Oxford University Press on Demand, 2002. (link)
  • [24] Beckhoof “25 Years of PC Control,” 2011. (link)
  • [25] Shuang Yu “IEEE 802.3 ‘Standard for Ethernet’ Marks 30 Years of Innovation and Global Market Growth,” Press release IEEE, June 24, 2013. Retrieved January 11, 2014. (link)
  • [26] Brooks, R. “New approaches to robotics,”in Science, 253(5025), 1991, 1227–1232. (link)
  • [27] World Heritage Encyclopedia, “International Federation of Robotics” in World Heritage Encyclopedia (link)
  • [28] Lapham, J. “ RobotScript™: the introduction of a universal robot programming language,” Industrial Robot: An International Journal, 26(1),1999, pp. 17–25 (link)
  • [29]García Marín, J. A. “New concepts in automation and robotic technology for surface engineering,” 2010. (link)
  • [30] Walter A Aviles, Robin T Laird, and Margaret E Myers. “Towards a modular robotic architecture,” in 1988 Robotics Conferences. International Society for Optics and Photonics, 1989, pp. 271–278 (link)
  • [31] Angle, C. “Genghis, a six legged autonomous walking robot,” Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1989. (link)
  • [32] Bovet, D. P., & Cesati, M. “Understanding the Linux Kernel: from I/O ports to process management,” in O’Reilly Media, Inc.” 2005. (link)
  • [33] Alpert, D., & Avnon, D. “Architecture of the Pentium microprocessor,” in IEEE micro, Vol. 13, 1993, pp.11–21. (link)
  • [34] Hollingum, J. “ABB focus on lean robotization,” in Industrial Robot: An International Journal, Vol. 21, 1994, pp.15–16. (link)
  • [35] Barabanov, M. “A Linux Based Real-Time Operating System,” 1996. (link)
  • [36] Yodaiken, V. “Cheap Operating systems Research,” in Published in the Proceedings of the First Conference on Freely Redistributable Systems, Cambridge MA, 1996 (link)
  • [37] Decotignie, J. D. “Ethernet-based real-time and industrial communications,” in Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 93, 2005, pp.1102–1117. (link)
  • [38] Wade, S., Dunnigan, M. W., & Williams, B. W. “Modeling and simulation of induction machine vector control with rotor resistance identification,” in IEEE transactions on power electronics, Vol. 12, 1997, pp.495–506. (link)
  • [39] Campbell, M., Hoane, A. J., & Hsu, F. H. “Deep blue,” in Artificial intelligence, Vol. 134, 2002, pp.57–83. (link)
  • [40] Folkner, W. M., Yoder, C. F., Yuan, D. N., Standish, E. M., & Preston, R. A. “Interior structure and seasonal mass redistribution of Mars from radio tracking of Mars Pathfinder,” in Science 278(5344), 1997, pp.1749–1752. (link)
  • [41] Cliburn, D. C. “Experiences with the LEGO Mindstorms throughout the undergraduate computer science curriculum,”in Frontiers in Education Conference, 36th Annual,IEEE, October 2006, pp.1–6. (link)
  • [42] Rowe S., R Wagner C. “An introduction to the joint architecture for unmanned systems (JAUS),” in Ann Arbor 1001, 2008. (link)
  • [43] Fujita, M. “On activating human communications with pet-type robot AIBO,” in Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 92, 2004, pp.1804–1813.(link)
  • [44] Breazeal, C. L. “Sociable machines: Expressive social exchange between humans and robots,” in Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2000. (link)
  • [45] Rafiei, M., Elmi, S. M., & Zare, A. “Wireless communication protocols for smart metering applications in power distribution networks,” in Electrical Power Distribution Networks (EPDC), 2012 Proceedings of 17th Conference on. IEEE, May 2012, pp. 1–5. (link)
  • [46] Brian Gerkey, Richard T Vaughan, and Andrew Howard. “The Player/Stage project: Tools for multi-robot and distributed sensor systems” in Proceedings of the 11th international conference on advanced robotics. Vol. 1. 2003, pp. 317–323. (link)
  • [47] Herman Bruyninckx. “Open robot control software: the OROCOS project” in Robotics and Automation, 2001. Proceedings 2001 icra. ieee International Conference on. Vol. 3. IEEE. 2001, pp. 2523–2528. (link)
  • [48] Hirose, M., & Ogawa, K. “Honda humanoid robots development,” in Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences, 365(1850), 2007, pp.11–19. (link)
  • [49] Mohr, F. W., Falk, V., Diegeler, A., Walther, T., Gummert, J. F., Bucerius, J., … & Autschbach, R. “Computer-enhanced “robotic” cardiac surgery: experience in 148 patients” in The Journal of thoracic and cardiovascular surgery, 121(5), 2001, pp.842–853. (link)
  • [50] Jones, J. L., Mack, N. E., Nugent, D. M., & Sandin, P. E. “U.S. Patent №6,883,201,” in Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, 2005. (link)
  • [51] Jansen, D., & Buttner, H. “Real-time Ethernet: the EtherCAT solution,” in Computing and Control Engineering, 15(1), 2004, pp. 16–21. (link)
  • [52] Koenig, N., & Howard, A. “Design and use paradigms for gazebo, an open-source multi-robot simulator,” in Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2004.(IROS 2004). Proceedings. 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on IEEE., Vol. 3, September 2004, pp. 2149–2154. (link)
  • [53] Cousins, S. “Willow garage retrospective [ros topics],” in IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 21(1), 2014, pp.16–20. (link)
  • [54] Garage, W. Robot operating system. 2009. [Online]. (link)
  • [55] Fisher A. “Inside Google’s Quest To Popularize Self-Driving Cars,” in Popular Science, Bonnier Corporation, Retrieved 10 October 2013. (link)
  • [56] Cousins, S. “Ros on the pr2 [ros topics],” in IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 17(3), 2010, pp.23–25. (link)
  • [57] PARROT, S. A. “Parrot AR. Drone,” 2010. (link)
  • [58] Honda Motor Co. ASIMO, 2011. [Online]. (link)
  • [59] Shen, F., Yu, H., Sakurai, K., & Hasegawa, O. “An incremental online semi-supervised active learning algorithm based on self-organizing incremental neural network,” in Neural Computing and Applications, 20(7), 2011, pp.1061–1074. (link)
  • [60] Industria 4.0 en la Feria de Hannover: La senda hacia la “fábrica inteligente” pasa por la Feria de Hannover, sitio digital ‘Deutschland’, 7 de abril de 2014 (link)
  • [61] Richardson, Matt, and Shawn Wallace “Getting started with raspberry PI,” in O’Reilly Media, Inc., 2012. (link)
  • [62] Edwards, S., & Lewis, C. “Ros-industrial: applying the robot operating system (ros) to industrial applications,” in IEEE Int. Conference on Robotics and Automation, ECHORD Workshop, May 2012. (link)
  • [63] Canis, B. Unmanned aircraft systems (UAS): Commercial outlook for a new industry. Congressional Research Service, Washington, 2015, p.8. (link)
  • [64] Trishan de Lanerolle, The Dronecode Foundation aims to keep UAVs open, Jul 2015. [Online] (link)
  • [65] Savioke, Your Robot Butler Has Arrived, August 2014. [Online]. (link)
  • [66] ABB, “ABB introduces Yumi, world´s first truly collaborative dual-arm robot”, 2015. Press release (link)
  • [67] LEE, Chang-Shing, et al. Human vs. Computer Go: Review and Prospect [Discussion Forum]. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine, 2016, vol. 11, no 3, pp. 67–72. (link)
  • [68] Bogue, R. (2015). Sensors for robotic perception. Part one: human interaction and intentions. Industrial Robot: An International Journal, 42(5), pp.386–391 (link)
  • [69] The Linux foundation, official wiki. 2009. [Online]. (link)
  • [70] The Tesla Team, “ All Tesla Cars Being Produced Now Have Full Self-Driving Hardware” Official web, 19 Oct. 2016. [Online]. (link)
  • [71] Brian Gerkey. Why ROS 2.0?, 2014. [Online]. (link)
  • [72] Acutronic Robotics, “H-ROS: Hardware Robot Operating System”, 2016. [Online]. (link)
  • [73] Judith Viladomat, TALOS:the next step in humanoid robots from PAL Robotics. 4 Oct. 2016 [Online]. (link)

Source: Robohub

To visit any links mentioned please view the original article, the link is at the top of this post.
14
AI Programming / Re: Rivescript not working as expected
« Last post by brty21 on March 27, 2017, 10:22:23 AM »
Here's a short couple of scripts that I came up with which use PHP and javascript to interface with MaryTTS.

Browsers/JS don't like cross site scripting. There's ways to get around it, but I find them complicated and it's easily solved with a relay for testing purposes. You can get into all that other gubbins later if you want.

Take these two scripts and put them in some directory that is useful to you. The HTML/JS script calls the PHP. The PHP calls Mary. The PHP then sends what it got from Mary back to the client or browser. The client then plays it.

The main reason why you get the cross site problem is that Mary uses a different port compared to normal, ie port 80 in most cases.



Here's the HTML/JS :

Code: [Select]
<html>

<title>Demo Play TTS</title>

<head>

</head>

<script>

// It's a pain using JS for cross site so just use a simple PHP relay to start with.
var relay = "gettts.php";

// The words to render.
var tts = "Just a simple Demo. Refresh page if you change the words in the script.";

// The URL for the relay with the words added on.
var url = relay + "?words=" + tts;

// Set up an audio player and get the audio from the relay URL.
var audio = new Audio(url);

// Play the audio which would have been made by Mary.
audio.play();

</script>

<body>

Just a simple Demo. Refresh page if you change the words in the script.

</body>

</html>

And the PHP...

Code: [Select]
<?php

// Your server or host.
$host "http://localhost";

// A voice you have installed with Mary.
$voice "cmu-slt-hsmm";

// Get the words sent from the JS - best to do some sanitising here later.
$words $_GET['words'];

// URL to the Mary port and various settings.
$url $host  ":59125/process?INPUT_TEXT=" $words ".&INPUT_TYPE=TEXT&OUTPUT_TYPE=AUDIO&LOCALE=en_US&AUDIO=WAVE_FILE&VOICE=" $voice;

// Mary doesn't like spaces.
$url str_replace(" ""+"$url);

// Get the WAV file from Mary.
$wav file_get_contents($url);

// Set a header for the client.
header('Content-Type: audio/wav');

// Echo the audio data.
echo $wav;

// End.
die();

Have a play with that. Save the PHP as 'gettts.php' and the HTML whatever you see fit. Change the JS variable 'tts' to whatever you like. Just hit the HTML page in your browser to see what it does.

Hopefully it will work, it did for me. You may have to change the voice setting if you don't have that one, but I think that is the default voice when installing.

Note that PHP is server side - so you need to browse to the HTML via your local host. Just double clicking on the HTML file will not work.
:)

Working well, Thanks a lot! At least I have some idea now

Since RiveScript is working as expected now. I will post new topics to new threads
15
Downloaded Unreal Engine 4.

Unity sucks. Not looking there.

UE4 has better physics.

UE4 has better render.

UE4 has BLUEPRINT blocks THIS IS LIKE EV3 THAT ROBOT I MADE JUST HAS MOST OF C++ FUNCTIONALITY NOW OOOHHHHHH MY GODDDDDDDDDDD!!!!!!!!!

HE'S USING IT! HE'S USING IT!!!!
http://advancessss.deviantart.com/art/5768787887-671325557?ga_submit_new=10%3A1490592637

.........................My eyes are falling out.... This is so juicy !
https://forums.unrealengine.com/forumdisplay.php?76-Job-Offerings
16
Robotics News / Choreographing automated cars could save time, money and lives
« Last post by Tyler on March 27, 2017, 04:49:29 AM »
Choreographing automated cars could save time, money and lives
15 March 2017, 2:00 pm



If you take humans out of the driving seat, could traffic jams, accidents and high fuel bills become a thing of the past? As cars become more automated and connected, attention is turning to how to best choreograph the interaction between the tens or hundreds of automated vehicles that will one day share the same segment of Europe’s road network.

It is one of the most keenly studied fields in transport – how to make sure that automated cars get to their destinations safely and efficiently. But the prospect of having a multitude of vehicles taking decisions while interacting on Europe’s roads is leading researchers to design new traffic management systems suitable for an era of connected transport.

The idea is to ensure that traffic flows as smoothly and efficiently as possible, potentially avoiding the jams and delays caused by human behaviour.

‘Travelling distances and time gaps between vehicles are crucial,’ said Professor Markos Papageorgiou, head of the Dynamic Systems & Simulation Laboratory at the Technical University of Crete, Greece. ‘It is also important to consider things such as how vehicles decide which lane to drive in.’

Prof. Papageorgiou’s TRAMAN21 project, funded by the EU’s European Research Council, is studying ways to manage the behaviour of individual vehicles, as well as highway control systems.

For example, the researchers have been looking at how adaptive cruise control (ACC) could improve traffic flows. ACC is a ‘smart’ system that speeds up and slows down a car as necessary to keep up with the one in front. Highway control systems using ACC to adjust time gaps between cars could help to reduce congestion.

‘It may be possible to have a traffic control system that looks at the traffic situation and recommends or even orders ACC cars to adopt a shorter time gap from the car in front,’ Prof. Papageorgiou said.

‘So during a peak period, or if you are near a bottleneck, the system could work out a gap that helps you avoid the congestion and gives higher flow and higher capacity at the time and place where this is needed.’

Variable speed limits

TRAMAN21, which runs to 2018, has been running tests on a highway near Melbourne, Australia, and is currently using variable speed limits to actively intervene in traffic to improve flows.

An active traffic management system of this kind could even help when only relatively few vehicles on the highway have sophisticated automation. But he believes that self-driving vehicle systems must be robust enough to be able to communicate with each other even when there are no overall traffic control systems.



‘Schools of fish and flocks of birds do not have central controls, and the individuals base their movement on the information from their own senses and the behaviour of their neighbours,’ Prof. Papageorgiou said.

‘In theory this could also work in traffic flow, but there is a lot of work to be done if this is to be perfected. Nature has had a long head-start.’

One way of managing traffic flow is platooning – a way to schedule trucks to meet up and drive in convoy on the highway. Magnus Adolfson from Swedish truckmaker Scania AB, who coordinated the EU-funded COMPANION project, says that platooning – which has already been demonstrated on Europe’s roads – can also reduce fuel costs and accidents.

The three-year project tested different combinations of distances between trucks, speeds and unexpected disruptions or stoppages.

Fuel savings

In tests with three-vehicle platoons, researchers achieved fuel savings of 5 %. And by keeping radio contact with each other, the trucks can also reduce the risk of accidents.

‘About 90 percent of road accidents are caused by driver error, and this system, particularly by taking speed out of the driver’s control, can make it safer than driving with an actual driver,’ Adolfson said.

The COMPANION project also showed the benefits of close communication between vehicles to reduce the likelihood of braking too hard and causing traffic jams further back.

‘There is enough evidence to show that using such a system can have a noticeable impact, so it would be good to get it into production as soon as possible,’ Adolfson said. The researchers have extended their collaboration to working with the Swedish authorities on possible implementation.

Rutger Beekelaar, a project manager at Dutch-based research organisation TNO, says that researchers need to demonstrate how automated cars can work safely together in order to increase their popularity.

‘Collaboration is essential to ensure vehicles can work together,’ he said. ‘We believe that in the near future, there will be more and more automation in traffic, in cars and trucks. But automated driving is not widely accepted yet.’

To tackle this, Beekelaar led a group of researchers in the EU-funded i-GAME project, which developed technology that uses wireless communication that contributes to managing and controlling automated vehicles.

They demonstrated these systems in highway conditions in the 2016 Grand Cooperative Driving Challenge in Helmond, in the Netherlands, which put groups of real vehicles through their paces to demonstrate cooperation, how they safely negotiated an intersection crossing, and merged with another column of traffic.

Beekelaar says that their technology is now being used in other European research projects, but that researchers, auto manufacturers, policymakers, and road authorities still need to work together to develop protocols, systems and standardisation, along with extra efforts to address cyber security, ethics and particularly the issue of public acceptance.

Source: Robohub

To visit any links mentioned please view the original article, the link is at the top of this post.
17
Robotics News / Three years on: An update from Leka, Robot Launch winner
« Last post by Tyler on March 26, 2017, 10:49:19 PM »
Three years on: An update from Leka, Robot Launch winner
15 March 2017, 10:00 am



Nearly three years ago, Leka won the Grand Prize at the 2014 Robot Launch competition for their robotic toy set on changing the way children with developmental disorders learn, play and progress. Leka will be the first interactive tool for children with developmental disorders that is available for direct purchase to the public. Designed for use in the home and not limited to a therapist’s office, Leka enables streamlined communication between therapists, parents and children easier, more efficient and more accessible through its monitoring platform. Leka’s co-founder and CEO, Ladislas de Toldi, writes about Leka’s progress since the Robot Launch competition and where the company is headed in the next year.

Since winning the Robot Launch competition in 2014, Leka has made immense progress and is well on it’s way to getting in the hands of exceptional children around the globe.

2016 was a big year for us; Leka was accepted into the 2016 class of the Sprint Accelerator Program, powered by Techstars, in Kansas City, MO. The whole team picked up and moved from Paris, France to the United States for a couple of months to work together as a team and create the best version of Leka possible.



Techstars was for us the opportunity to really test the US Special Education Market. We came to the program with two goals in mind: to build a strong community around our project in Kansas City and the area, and to launch our crowdfunding campaign on Indiegogo.

The program gave us an amazing support system to connect with people in the Autism community in the area and to push ourselves to build the best crowdfunding campaign targeting special education.

We’re incredibly humbled to say we succeeded in both: Kansas City is going to be our home base in the US, thanks to all the partnerships we now have with public schools and organizations.

Near the end of our accelerator program in May 2016, we launched our Indiegogo campaign to raise funds for Leka’s development and manufacturing—and ended up raising more than 150 percent of our total fundraising goal. We had buyers from all over the world including the United States, France, Israel, Australia and Uganda! As of today, we have reached +$145k on Indiegogo with more than 300 units preordered.



In July, the entire Leka team moved back to Paris to finalize the hardware development of Leka and kick off the manufacturing process. Although the journey has been full of challenges, we are thrilled with the progress we have made on Leka and the impact it can make on the lives of children.

This past fall, we partnered with Bourgogne Service Electronics (BSE) for manufacturing. BSE is a French company and we’re working extremely close with them on Leka’s design. Two of our team members, Alex and Gareth, recently worked with BSE to finalize the design and create what we consider to be Leka’s heart—an electronic card. The card allows Leka’s lights, movements and LCD screen to come to life.



We were also able to integrate proximity sensors into Leka, so that it can know where children are touching it, and lead to better analytics and progress monitoring in the future.

We have had quite a few exciting opportunities in the past year at industry events as well! We attended the Techstars alumni conference FounderCon, in Cincinnati, OH, and CES Unveiled in Paris in the Fall. We then had the opportunity to present Leka in front of some amazing industry professionals at the Wall Street Journal’s WSJ.D Live in Laguna Beach, CA. But most exciting was CES in Las Vegas this past January, and the announcements we made at the show.

At CES, we were finally able to unveil our newest industrial-grade prototypes with the autonomous features we’ve been working toward for the past three years. With Leka’s new fully integrated sensors, children can play with the robotic toy on their own, making it much more humanlike and interactive. These new features allow Leka to better help children understand social cues and improve their interpersonal skills.

At CES we also introduced Leka’s full motor integration, vibration and color capabilities, and the digital screen. Leka’s true emotions can finally show!

In the six months between our Indiegogo campaign, and CES Las Vegas, we were able to make immense improvements toward Leka, and pour our hearts into the product we believe will change lives for exception children and their families. We’re currently developing our next industrial prototype so we can make Leka even better, and we’re aiming to begin shipping in Fall 2017. We can’t wait to show you all the final product!

*All photos credit: Leka

About Leka

Leka is a robotic smart toy set on changing the way children with developmental disorders learn, play and progress. Available for direct purchase online through InDemand, Leka is an interactive tool designed to make communication between therapists, parents and children easier, more efficient and more accessible. Working with and adapting to each child’s own needs and abilities, Leka is able to provide vital feedback to parents and therapists on a child’s progress and growth.

Founded in France with more than two years in R&D, the company recently completed its tenure at the 2016 Sprint Accelerators Techstars program and is rapidly growing. Leka expects to begin shipping out units to Indiegogo backers in Fall 2017.

For more information, please visit http://leka.io.

If you liked this article, read more about Leka on Robohub here:

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Source: Robohub

To visit any links mentioned please view the original article, the link is at the top of this post.
18
Here's what I came up with from my above questions.

If I'm gonna pay someone 1,200 and up it already is at, then it better be the best physics this guy uses.

So, either Unreal Engine 4 or Source 2...and the modelling program as Blender. This covers those other needs/wants. Reason I HAD didn't want to switch is because Blender's render (Cycles). . .

I think I'm getting somewhere.....................

But what about unity physics vs unreal engine 4 physics?

Downloading both.
19
Robotics News / The Drone Center’s Weekly Roundup: 3/13/17
« Last post by Tyler on March 26, 2017, 04:49:50 PM »
The Drone Center’s Weekly Roundup: 3/13/17
14 March 2017, 1:43 pm

Norway has established a test site at Trondheim Fjord for unmanned and autonomous vessels like these concept container ships of the future. Credit: Kongsberg Seatex March 6, 2017 – March 12, 2017

News

Germany reportedly intends to acquire the Northrop Grumman MQ-4C Triton high-altitude surveillance drone, according to a story in Sueddeutsche Zeitung. In 2013, Germany cancelled a similar program to acquire Northrop Grumman’s RQ-4 Global Hawk, a surveillance drone on which the newer Triton is based, due to cost overruns. The Triton is a large, long-endurance system that was originally developed for maritime surveillance by the U.S. Navy. (Reuters)

The U.S. Army released a report outlining its strategy for obtaining and using unmanned ground vehicles. The Robotics and Autonomous Systems strategy outlines short, medium, and long-term goals for the service’s ground robot programs. The Army expects a range of advanced unmanned combat vehicles to be fielded in the 2020 to 2030 timeframe. (IHS Jane’s 360)

The U.S. Air Force announced that there are officially more jobs available for MQ-1 Predator and MQ-9 Reaper pilots than for any manned aircraft pilot position. Following a number of surges in drone operations, the service had previously struggled to recruit and retain drone pilots. The Air Force is on track to have more than 1,000 Predator and Reaper pilots operating its fleet. (Military.com)

Commentary, Analysis, and Art

At Shephard Media, Grant Turnbull writes that armed unmanned ground vehicles are continuing to proliferate.

At Wired, Paul Sarconi looks at how the introduction of cheap, consumer-oriented underwater drones could affect different industries.

At Recode, April Glaser looks at how a key part of the U.S. government’s drone regulations appears to be based on a computer simulation from 1968.

At FlightGlobal, Dominic Perry writes that France’s Dassault is not concerned that the U.K. decision to leave the E.U. will affect a plan to develop a combat drone with BAE Systems.

At Drone360, Kara Murphy profiles six women who are contributing to and influencing the world of drones.

At DroningON, Ash argues that the SelFly selfie drone KickStarter project may go the way of the failed Zano drone.

At the Los Angeles Times, Bryce Alderton looks at how cities in California are addressing the influx of drones with new regulations.

At CBS News, Larry Light looks at how Bill Gates has reignited a debate over taxes on companies that use robots.

In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Andrew Ng and Neil Jacobstein argue that artificial intelligence will bring about significant changes to commerce and society in the next 10 to 15 years.

In testimony before the House Armed Services Committee’s subcommittee on seapower, panelists urged the U.S. Navy to develop and field unmanned boats and railguns. (USNI News)

The Economist looks at how aluminium batteries could provide underwater drones with increased range and endurance.

At Buzzfeed, Mike Giglio examines the different ways that ISIS uses drones to gain an advantage over Iraqi troops in Mosul.

At DefenseTech.org, Richard Sisk looks at how a U.S.-made vehicle-mounted signals “jammer” is helping Iraqi forces prevent ISIS drone attacks in Mosul.

In a Drone Radio Show podcast, Steven Flynn discusses why prioritizing drone operators who comply with federal regulations is important for the drone industry.

At ABC News, Andrew Greene examines how a push by the Australian military to acquire armed drones has reignited a debate over targeted killings.

At Smithsonian Air & Space, Tim Wright profiles the NASA High Altitude Shuttle System, a glider drone that is being used to test communications equipment for future space vehicles.

At NPR Marketplace, Douglas Starr discusses the urgency surrounding the push to develop counter-drone systems.

Know Your Drone

Researchers at Virginia Tech are flying drones into crash-test dummies to evaluate the potential harm that a drone could cause if it hits a human. (Bloomberg)

Meanwhile, researchers at École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne are developing flexible multi-rotor drones that absorb the impact of a collision without breaking. (Gizmodo)

The China Academy of Aerospace Aerodynamics is readying its Caihong solar-powered long-endurance drone for its maiden flight, which is scheduled for mid-year. (Eco-Business)

Meanwhile, the China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation has announced that it is developing drones with stealth capabilities. (Voice of America)

During an exercise, defense firm Rafael successfully launched a missile from an Israeli Navy unmanned boat. (Times of Israel)

Technology firms Thales and Unifly unveiled the ECOsystem UTM, an air traffic management system for drones. (Unmanned Systems Technology)

Norway’s government has approved a plan to establish a large test site for unmanned maritime vehicles at the Trondheim Fjord. (Phys.org)

Automaker Land Rover unveiled a search and rescue SUV equipped with a roof-mounted drone. (TechCrunch)

U.S. chipmaker NVIDIA has launched the Jetson TX2, an artificial intelligence platform that can be used in drones and robots. (Engadget)

Recent satellite images of Russia’s Gromov Flight Research Institute appear to show the country’s new Orion, a medium-altitude long-endurance military drone. (iHLS)

Technology firms Aveillant and DSNA Services are partnering to develop a counter-drone system. (AirTrafficManagement.net)

Aerospace firm Airbus has told reporters that it is serious about producing its Pop.Up passenger drone concept vehicle. (Wired)

Drones at Work

The Peruvian National Police are looking to deploy drones for counter-narcotics operations. (Business Insider)

The U.S. Air Force used a multi-rotor drone to conduct a maintenance inspection of a C-17 cargo plane. (U.S. Air Force)

India is reportedly looking to deploy U.S drones for surveillance operations along the Line of Control on the border with Pakistan. (Times of India)

The Fire Department of New York used its tethered multi-rotor drone for the first time during an apartment fire in the Bronx. (Crain’s New York)

The Michigan State Police Bomb Squad used an unmanned ground vehicle to inspect the interior of two homes that were damaged by a large sinkhole. (WXYZ)

A video posted to YouTube appears to show a woman in Washington State firing a gun at a drone that was flying over her property. (Huffington Post)

Meanwhile, a bill being debated in the Oklahoma State Legislature would remove civil liability for anybody who shoots a drone down over their private property. (Ars Technica)

In a promotional video, the company that makes Oreos into cups of milk. (YouTube)

The NYC Drone Film Festival will hold its third annual event this week. (YouTube)

An Arizona man who leads an anti-immigration vigilante group is using a drone to patrol the U.S border with Mexico in search of undocumented crossings. (Voice of America)

A man who attempted to use a drone to smuggle drugs into a Scottish prison has been sentenced to five years in prison. (BBC)

Industry Intel

The Turkish military has taken a delivery of six Bayraktar TB-2 military drones, two of which are armed, for air campaigns against ISIL and Turkish forces. (Defense News)

The U.S. Navy awarded Boeing Insitu a contract for RQ-21A Blackjack and ScanEagle drones. (FBO)

The U.S. Army awarded Riegl a $30,021 contract for LiDAR accessories for the Riegl RiCopter drone. (FBO)

General Atomics Aeronautical Systems awarded Hughes Network Systems a contract for satellite communications for the U.K.’s Predator B drones. (Space News)

Schiebel awarded CarteNav Solutions a contact for its AIMS-ISR software for the S-100 Camcopter unmanned helicopters destined for the Royal Australian Navy. (Press Release)

Defence Research and Development Canada awarded Ontario Drive & Gear a $1 million contract for trials of the Atlas J8 unmanned ground vehicle. (Canadian Manufacturing)

Kratos Defense and Security Solutions reported a $5.6 million contract for aerial targeted drones for the U.S. government. (Shephard Media)

Deveron UAS will provide Thompsons, a subsidiary of Lansing Trade Group and The Andersons, with drone data for agricultural production through 2018. (Press Release)

Precision Vectors Aerial selected the Silent Falcon UAS for its beyond visual line-of-sight operations in Canada. (Shephard Media)

Rolls-Royce won a grant from Tekes, a Finnish government research funding agency, to continue developing remote and autonomous shipping technologies. (Shephard Media)

Israeli drone manufacturer BlueBird is submitting an updated MicroB UAV system for the Indian army small UAV competition. (FlightGlobal)

A Romanian court has suspended a planned acquisition of Aeronautics Defense Systems Orbiter 4 drones for the Romanian army. (FlightGlobal)

Deere & Co.—a.k.a. John Deere—announced that it will partner with Kespry, a drone startup, to market drones for the construction and forestry industries. (TechCrunch)

For updates, news, and commentary, follow us on Twitter. The Weekly Drone Roundup is a newsletter from the Center for the Study of the Drone. It covers news, commentary, analysis and technology from the drone world. You can subscribe to the Roundup here.

Source: Robohub

To visit any links mentioned please view the original article, the link is at the top of this post.
20
Korrelan come on you gotta know this... (maybe he wants to create AGI before I do hehe)

Long-term Engine needs/wants:

- Speed of the code/etc if big difference
- parallelism
- somatosensory pressure/temperature receptors and other functions/tools/operations
- physics

- renders the best, technically not needed, but seriously desired
- closer to Blender so I couldddd use it, not needed

I'm thinking about UE4. But that still needs a modelling program...
Use Blender.

Any program should allow tones of processor/storage else be slow and freeze. I'll have enough storage and access/compute time otherwise bear the slowness or have to upgrade (unless they film it on their pc).
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10

Welcome

Please login or register.



Login with username, password and session length

Users Online

25 Guests, 2 Users
Users active in past 15 minutes:
LOCKSUIT, squarebear
[Trusty Member]
[Terminator]

Most Online Today: 47. Most Online Ever: 208 (August 27, 2008, 08:24:30 AM)

Articles