The dynamic emergence of categories through imitation

doi:10.1017/CBO9780511489808.013

9 - The dynamic emergence of categories through imitation

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 10 December 2009

Tony Belpaeme ,

Bart de Boer and

Bart Jansen

Edited by

Chrystopher L. Nehaniv and

Kerstin Dautenhahn

Show author details

Tony Belpaeme: Affiliation:
School of Computing, Communications and Electronics, University of Plymouth, UK
Bart de Boer: Affiliation:
Rijksuniversiteit Groningen, Kunstmatige Intelligentie, The Netherlands
Bart Jansen: Affiliation:
Artificial Intelligence Lab, Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Belgiam
Chrystopher L. Nehaniv: Affiliation:
University of Hertfordshire
Kerstin Dautenhahn: Affiliation:
University of Hertfordshire

Book contents

Get access

Summary

Introduction

Imitation is a powerful mechanism to culturally propagate and maintain knowledge and abilities. Not only humans rely heavily on imitation and social learning in general, but also animals such as dolphins, some bird species and some primates rely on imitation to acquire gestures and articulations (see e.g. Dautenhahn and Nehaniv, 2002b; Whiten and Ham, 1992). Studies on social learning in cognitive science have concentrated on mimicry, joint attention, the relationship between imitator and imitated, theory of mind, intentionality, speech (Kuhl and Meltzoff, 1996) and learning affordances of objects and tools (Tomasello, 1999). All these issues have been considered by artificial intelligence in constructing artefacts that learn from imitation, either in simulation (e.g. Alissandrakis et al., 2001) or on robotic platforms (e.g. Kuniyoshi et al., 1994; Gaussier et al., 1998; Billard and Hayes, 1997; Schaal, 1999). In this chapter however we wish to pay attention to the role of the social medium in which imitation takes place. Often, imitation is considered to take place only between two agents: one acts as teacher and the other as student. The teacher is in possession of a full repertoire of gestures, actions or articulations, which the student has to acquire through imitation learning. This is of course a valid approach when one is interested in the paradigm of imitation to program artefacts by demonstration (Bakker and Kuniyoshi, 1996).

Type: Chapter
Information: Imitation and Social Learning in Robots, Humans and Animals
Behavioural, Social and Communicative Dimensions
, pp. 179 - 194

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511489808.013 [Opens in a new window]

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

Print publication year: 2007

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Book purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alissandrakis, A., Nehaniv, C. L. and Dautenhahn, K. (2001). Through the looking-glass with ALICE – trying to imitate using correspondences. In Balkenius, C., Zlatev, J., Kozima, H., Dautenhahn, K. and Breazeal, C. (eds.), Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Epigenetic Robotics: Modeling Cognitive Development in Robotic Systems, Lund University Cognitive Studies. September 17–18, 2001, Lund, Sweden, Vol. 85.Google Scholar

Alissandrakis, A., Nehaniv, C. L. and Dautenhahn, K. (2003). Synchrony and perception in robotic imitation across embodiments. In IEEE International Symposium on computational intelligence in robotics and automation (CIRA '03), 923–30.

Alissandrakis, A., Nehaniv, C. L. and Dautenhahn, K. (2004). Towards robot cultures? Learning to imitate in a robotic arm test-bed with dissimilar embodied agents. Interaction studies: Social behaviour and communication in biological and artificial systems, 5, 3–44.CrossRef Google Scholar

Bakker, P. and Kuniyoshi, Y. (1996). Robot see, robot do: an overview of robot imitation. In Proceedings of the AISB Workshop on Learning in Robots and Animals, Brighton, UK, April 1996, 3–11.Google Scholar

Billard, A. and Hayes, G. (1997). Transmitting communication skills through imitation in autonomous robots. In Birk, A. and Demiris, Y. (eds.), Proceedings of EWLR97, Sixth European Workshop on Learning Robots. Brighton, UK, July 1997.Google Scholar

Billard, A. and Matarić, M. J. (2001). Learning human arm movements by imitation: evaluation of a biologically inspired connectionist architecture. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 37(2–3), 145–60.CrossRef Google Scholar

Dautenhahn, K. and Nehaniv, C. L. (2002a). The agent-based perspective on imitation. In Dautenhahn, K. and Nehaniv, C. L. (eds.), Imitation in Animals and Artifacts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–40.Google Scholar

Dautenhahn, K. and Nehaniv, C. L. (eds.) (2002b). Imitation in Animals and Artifacts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar

Boer, B. (2000). Self-organisation in vowel systems. Journal of Phonetics, 28(4), 441–65.CrossRef Google Scholar

Boer, B. (2001). The Origins of Vowel Systems. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gaussier, P., Moga, S., Quoy, M. and Banquet, J.-P. (1998). From perception-action loops to imitation processes: a bottom-up approach of learning by imitation. Applied Artificial Intelligence, 12(7–8), 701–27.CrossRef Google Scholar

Jansen, B. (2003). An imitation game for emerging action categories. In Banzhaf, W., Christaller, T., Dittrich, P., Kim, J. T. and Ziegler, J. (eds.), Advances in Artificial Life, 7th European Conference on Artificial Life (ECAL 2003), Dortmund, Germany, Vol. 2801 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin: Springer, 800–9.Google Scholar

Jansen, B., de Boer, B. and Belpaeme, T. (2004a). You did it on purpose! Towards intentional embodied agents. In Iida, F., Pfeifer, R., Steels, L. and Kuniyoshi, Y. (eds.), Embodied Artificial Intelligence. Berlin: Springer, 271–7.CrossRef Google Scholar

Jansen, B., De Vylder, B., Belpaeme, T. and de Boer, B. (2003). Emerging shared action categories in robotic agents through imitation. In Dautenhahn, K. and Nehaniv, C. L. (eds.), Second International Symposium on Imitation in Animals and Artifacts 2003. The Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and the Simulation of Behavior, 145–52.Google Scholar

Jansen, B., ten Thij, T., Belpaeme, T., De Vylder, B. and de Boer, B. (2004b). Imitation in embodied agents results in self-organization of behavior. In Schaal, S., Ijspeert, A. J., Billard, A. and Vijayakumar, S. (eds.), From Animals to Animats: Proceedings of the 8th Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar

Kuhl, P. K. and Meltzoff, A. N. (1996). Infant vocalizations in response to speech: vocal imitation and developmental change. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 100(4), 2425–38.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Kuniyoshi, Y., Inaba, M. and Inoue, H. (1994). Learning by watching: extracting reusable task knowledge from visual observation of human performance. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 10(6), 799–822.CrossRef Google Scholar

Nehaniv, C. L. and Dautenhahn, K. (2000). The correspondence problem. In Dautenhahn, K. and Nehaniv, C. (eds.), Imitation in Animals and Artifacts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 41–61.Google Scholar

Oudeyer, P.-Y. (2002). Phonemic coding might be a result of sensory-motor coupling dynamics. In Hallam, J. (ed.), Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 406–16.Google Scholar

Sanleoff, D. and Kruskal, J. B. (1983). Time Warps, String Edits, and Macromolecules: The Theory and Practice of Sequence Comparison, Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

Schaal, S. (1999). Is imitation learning the route to humanoid robots?Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 3(6), 233–42.CrossRef Google Scholar PubMed

Steels, L. (2000). Language as a complex adaptive system. In Schoenauer, M., Deb, K., Rudolph, G., Yao, X., Lutton, E., Merelo, J. J. and Schwefel, H.-P. (eds.), Proceedings of Parallel Problem Solving from Nature VI, Lecture Notes in Computer Science. Berlin, Germany: Springer.CrossRef Google Scholar

Tomasello, M. (1999). The cultural origins of human cognition. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar

Webb, B. (2001). Can robots make good models of biological behavior?Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 24(6), 1033–50.Google Scholar

Whiten, A. and Ham, R. (1992). On the nature and evolution of imitation in the animal kingdom: reappraisal of a century of research. In Slater, P., Rosenblatt, J., Beer, C. and Milinski, M. (eds.), Advances in the Study of Behavior, Vol. 21. San Diego, CA: Academic Press, 239–83.Google Scholar