Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T17:01:52.289Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Self-detection in robots: a method based on detecting temporal contingencies†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 January 2011

Alexander Stoytchev
Alexander Stoytchev*
Affiliation:
Developmental Robotics Laboratory, Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Iowa State University, Ames, IA 50011-2274, USAhttp://www.ece.iastate.edu/~alexs/
*
*Corresponding author. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

This paper addresses the problem of self-detection by a robot. The paper describes a methodology for autonomous learning of the characteristic delay between motor commands (efferent signals) and observed movements of visual stimuli (afferent signals). The robot estimates its own efferent-afferent delay from self-observation data gathered while performing motor babbling, i.e., random rhythmic movements similar to the primary circular reactions described by Piaget. After the efferent-afferent delay is estimated, the robot imprints on that delay and can later use it to successfully classify visual stimuli as either “self” or “other.” Results from robot experiments performed in environments with increasing degrees of difficulty are reported.

Keywords

Self-detectionSelf/other discriminationDevelopmental roboticsBehavior-based roboticsAutonomous robotics
Type
Article
Information
Robotica , Volume 29 , Special Issue 1: Robotic Self-X Systems , January 2011 , pp. 1 - 21
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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.)

Footnotes

†

This paper is based on Chapter V of the author's PhD dissertation from Georgia Tech. This material has not been previously published.

References

1.Aguilar, M. and Stiles, W., “Saturation of the rod mechanism of the retina at high levels of stimulation,” Optica Acta. 1, 59–65 (1954).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Bahrick, L. and Watson, J., “Detection of intermodal proprioceptive-visual contingency as a basis of self perception in infancy,” Dev. Psychol. 21, 963–973 (1985).Google Scholar
3.Barth, J., Povinelli, D. and Cant, J., “Bodily Origins of Self,” In: The Self and Memory (Beike, D., Lampinen, J. and Behrend, D., eds.) (Psychology Press, New York, 2004), pp. 11–43.Google Scholar
4.Catania, A., “Reinforcement Schedules and Psychophysical Judgments: A Study of Some Temporal Sroperties of Behavior,” In: The Theory of Reinforcement Schedules (Schoenfeld, W., ed.) (Appleton-Century-Crofts, New York, 1970), pp. 1–42.Google Scholar
5.de Waal, F., Bonobo: The Forgotten Ape (University of California Press, Berkeley, 1997).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
6.de Waal, F., Dindo, M., Freeman, C. and Hall, M., “The monkey in the mirror: Hardly a stranger,” Proc. Nation. Acad. Sci. (PNAS) 102 (32), 11140–11147 (2005).Google Scholar
7.Flom, R. and Bahrick, L., “Is featural information necessary for 5-month-olds' perception of motion specifying the self?,” Society for Research in Child Development, Minneapolis, MN (Apr. 2001).Google Scholar
8.Gallistel, C., “Time has come,” Neuron 38 (2), 149–150 (2003).Google Scholar
9.Gallistel, R. and Gibbon, J., “Time, rate and conditioning,” Psychol. Rev. 107, 289–344 (2000).Google Scholar
10.Gallup, G., “Chimpanzees: Self-recognition,” Science 167 (3914), 86–87, (1970).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
11.Gallup, G., “Self recognition in primates: A comparative approach to the bidirectional properties of consciousness,” Am. Psychol. 32, 329–338 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
12.Gallup, G., Anderson, J. and Shillito, D., “The Mirror Test,” In: The Cognitive Animal: Empirical and Theoretical Perspectives on Animal Cognition (Bekoff, M., Allen, C. and Burghardt, G., eds.) (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 2002).Google Scholar
13.Gibbon, J., “Scalar expectancy theory and Weber's law in animal timing,” Psychol. Rev. 84 (3), 279–325 (1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14.Gibbon, J., “Origins of scalar timing,” Learn. Motivation 22 (1–2), 3–38 (1991).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
15.Gibbon, J. and Church, R., “Sources of Variance in an Information Processing Theory of Timing,” In: Animal Cognition (Roitblat, H., Bever, T. and Terrace, H., eds.) (Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale, NJ, 1984), pp. 465–488.Google Scholar
16.Gibbon, J., Malapani, C., Dale, C. and Gallistel, C., “Toward a neurobiology of temporal cognition: Advances and challenges,” Curr. Opin. Neurobiol. 7 (2), 170–184 (1997).Google Scholar
17.Gold, K. and Scassellati, B., “Using probabilistic reasoning over time to self-recognize,” Robot. Auton. Syst. 57 (4), 384–392 (2009).Google Scholar
18.Johansson, G., “Visual perception of biological motion and a model for its analysis,” Perception Psychophys. 14, 201–11 (1973).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
19.Lewis, M. and Brooks-Gunn, J., Social Cognition and the Acquisition of Self (Plenum Press, New York, 1979).Google Scholar
20.Michel, P., Gold, K. and Scassellati, B., “Motion-Based Robotic Self-Recognition,” IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Sendai, Japan (2004).Google Scholar
21.Parker, S., Mitchell, R. and Boccia, M. (eds.), Self-Awareness in Animals and Humans: Developmental Perspectives (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994).Google Scholar
22.Pearl, J., Causality: Models, Reasoning and Inference (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2000).Google Scholar
23.Piaget, J., The Origins of Intelligence in Children (International Universities Press, New York, 1952).Google Scholar
24.Plotnik, J., de Waal, F. and Reiss, D., “Self-recognition in an Asian Elephant,” Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA (PNAS) 103 (45), 17053–17057 (2006).Google Scholar
25.Povinelli, D. and Cant, J., “Arboreal clambering and the evolution of self-conception,” Q. Rev. Biol. 70 (4), 393–421 (1995).Google Scholar
26.Reiss, D. and Marino, L., “Mirror self-recognition in the bottlenose dolphin: A case of cognitive convergence,” Proc. Nation. Acad. Sci. (PNAS) 98 (10), 5937–5942 (2001).CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
27.Rochat, P., “Five levels of self-awareness as they unfold early in life,” Consciousness Cognit. 12, 717–731 (2003).Google Scholar
28.Stoytchev, A., Robot Tool Behavior: A Developmental Approach to Autonomous Tool Use, PhD Thesis (College of Computing, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, Aug. 2007).Google Scholar
29.Stoytchev, A., “Toward Video-Guided Robot Behaviors,” Proceedings of the Seventh International Conference on Epigenetic Robotics (EpiRob), Rutgers University, NJ (Nov. 5–7, 2007), pp. 165–172.Google Scholar
30.Triesman, M., “Temporal discrimination and the indifference interval: Implications for a model of the “internal clock,” Psychol. Monogr. 77 (13) (1963).Google Scholar
31.Triesman, M., “Noise and Weber's law: The discrimination of brightness and other dimensions,” Psychol. Rev. 71, 314–330 (1964).Google Scholar
32.Watson, J., “Contingency Perception in Early Social Development,” In: Social Perception in Infants (Field, T. and Fox, N., eds.) (Ablex Pub. Corp., Norwood, NJ, 1985), pp. 157–176.Google Scholar
33.Watson, J., “Detection of self: The perfect algorithm,” In: Self-Awareness in Animals and Humans: Developmental Perspectives (Parker, S., Mitchell, R. and Boccia, M., eds.) (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1994), pp. 131–148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
34.Yoshikawa, Y., Hosoda, K. and Asada, M., “Cross-Anchoring for Binding Tactile and Visual Sensations via Unique Association Through Self-Perception,” Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Development and Learning (ICDL), La Jolla, CA (Oct. 22–22, 2004).Google Scholar