Robot walks independently with dynamic balancing

We're still chuckling about Asimo's sad little tumble last year, but Anybots' breakthrough dynamically balancing biped robot, Dexter, is no laughing matter. While he's sans arms for now, the 135-pound, 5'10" robot is being celebrated for the sole fact that he isn't pre-programmed and can support his own strut -- and supposedly, he'll soon be able to run. Dexter's partner in crime is Monty, a two-wheeled, two-armed bot with one fully articulated, 18-motor gripper hand. Driven by compressed air and controlled remotely by a human operator, both of these humanoid robots were developed with the intent to be of assistance in various household and industrial tasks.

[Via Slashdot]

Read - Anybots' Dexter and Monty humanoid robots
Read - Video of Dexter taking shoves from Monty

[JC @ Feb 28th 2007 11:28AM]

No disassemble! NO DISASSEMBLE!

[saboola @ Feb 28th 2007 11:46AM]

LOL Johnny Five is ALIVE!! Nice one..

[Mike @ Feb 28th 2007 3:25PM]

Ha. That one had me laughing. I can so hear that voice from long ago. No Disassemble Johnny 5!

[Chris Petrie @ Mar 2nd 2007 11:41PM]

Best Comment Ever. I salute you. :)

[duckhunt @ Feb 28th 2007 11:42AM]

So how much longer before they will be able to breakdance? Or do "the robot" ?????

[Joshua @ Feb 28th 2007 11:45AM]

So a robot walks independently with dynamic balancing into a bar...

[Loban @ Feb 28th 2007 11:59AM]

Praveen,

While 2 legs is not the best way to get around (6 to 8 legs would obviously be better as can be seen in the insect/arachnid world), it makes sense that a household robot intended for use in a home designed for a human would look humanoid. A robot with wheels would have more trouble getting up and down stairs, over small bumps, through doorways, etc. Also, wheels are great for speed and stability, but not for maneuverability. A car can certainly out "run" a horse, but it can't trek through a thick forest or over rocks? Whether you believe in evolution or divine creation, there's a reason humans are bipedal.

[bgdc @ Feb 28th 2007 12:37PM]

Actually, the whole bipedal thing is expressly because humans want servants that look like them. It serves no practical purpose for the robot to have 2 legs. It's totally and completely related to our myopic/hubristic view of the world. It's just like the utterly retarded comments about other planets/moons - "it has water and thus one of the building blocks for life" - yeah as if all life must need water.

Logically speaking 6 legs would be ideal - providing fast, stable locomotion.

If engineers/corporations really wanted to provide household assistants, they would aim for the easy route, no some worthless balancing bipedal robot.

[Paul @ Feb 28th 2007 12:40PM]

Could you further your position on why you feel that 6 legs would be better?

How would you coordinate the movement of the six legs?

[Paul @ Feb 28th 2007 12:39PM]

To add on to what I said.

Rather than use wheels, it makes sense to want to use legs if you are going to be moving over uneven ground or over obstacles. And rather than design one mechanism for moving over flat ground, another for uneven, and yet another for climbing stairs, they are trying to design one way of moving that covers all of these.

[marcoemerson @ Feb 28th 2007 12:45PM]

I for one welcome our sprinting, tapdancing, tightrope-walking, soccer-playing overlords.

[hooeezit @ Feb 28th 2007 12:49PM]

On the efficacy of a bipedal robot - you are overlooking one very important fact. Since (self-mobile) humans are bipedal, we build our spaces to be bipedal friendly. Sprain one of your legs and you will realize how difficult home and office spaces are to alternative modes of navigation. If you were building a robot to clean streets, would you give it tank treads just because it has more traction? So, it is important for a 'helping hand' robot that is supposed to work in our homes to have the same mobility (and sensory systems) as us. Otherwise, it will be deficient is some aspect or another.

[Brendon @ Feb 28th 2007 12:51PM]

And this is how you can be walking and falling at the same time.

[crackpipe @ Feb 28th 2007 12:59PM]

No matter what dance he does... wouldn't it always have to be called "the robot"

[James @ Feb 28th 2007 1:21PM]

TWO LEGS GOOD FOUR LEGS BAD!!

[Praveen @ Feb 28th 2007 1:41PM]

Is there any reason why companies try to recreate the bots for household and industrial work to look like us? Is there any advantage to get them walk like us, incorporating knee movements etc.? Would an alternative design be better, like wheels to move on floors, and some other mechanism to climb stairs? I would think that it's faster to move n wheels than run?

Of course, I didn't factor in the likely case that humans might be more comfortable to have helpers who look and act like they do... just my 2 cents.

[Paul @ Feb 28th 2007 12:36PM]

In addition to Lobans comment, I would add this:

When you are trying to design something that has not been created before it is easiest to look at nature and ask, "How do we move?" It might seem like a relatively simple question, we put one foot in front of the other and we go forward.

But really, there are hundreds, if not thousands of variables that go into this simple movement. We lift up the foot to a certain height depending on the terrain, we move our leg while shifting our body to keep balanced while moving our torso forward, then from what our eyes have gathered of the approaching terrain we place our foot at a precise angle and shift our weight onto it while at the same time maintaining some weight on our back foot just in case the front foot does not quite grip the ground.

Now, I can tell you all that just from my own non professional knowledge. We can not go ask a four legged creature, "How do you move?" We can observe them, but we can not get any real feedback from them.

It is easiest to design and program from what you know and what we know most intimately is our own bodies.

[Jason @ Feb 28th 2007 1:04PM]

I think the biggest advantage of human proportioned bipedal robots is that they can step into the place of a person.

A bipedal robot can cook in your kitchen, drive your car, do your laundry, etc, because it fits into the working environment naturally. Things like stairs, doors, counter tops, etc, were all designed to be used by bipedal humanoid shaped users; us.

That's not to say that a robot octopus couldn't be more productive when making you breakfast, but we need to take it one step at a time.

[Daniel Cheung @ Feb 28th 2007 1:45PM]

Examining how to replicate real-world processes help to understand how humans work as well. This is usually contrary to the thought that making something is for a specific purpose; in this case, examining how to create a walking robot will not only help understand the human body works physically, but also how the mind works as well through software.

What is key here, isn't the hardware (and hence the key news is NOT the bipedal motion). The key lies with the LEARNING SOFTWARE that this robot has. If this learning software is as good as it claims to be, then you can apply this to many other applications as well (such as using the learning algorithms to adapt to a complicated environment). There are many learning robots out there. This is just one of many. Have a look at this: http://www-humanoids.usc.edu/

[luis @ Feb 28th 2007 3:14PM]

Skynet approves

[Jeff @ Feb 28th 2007 3:20PM]

Why do we really have to create them in man's image?! can't we have freewheelin' helicopter hover-crafty robots with arms that can still do our bidding?! This way when they rise up and kill us all we can determine if that silhouette is a friendly human, or a MENACING GENOCIDE360lx200!

[JC @ Feb 28th 2007 3:31PM]

Come on, who are we kidding? The only reason we want bipedal robots is so that the natural progression, which is sexy robot ladies, will be lifelike.

My name Borat. I want make sexy time with robot girl with two legs. Not four, not spider legs. Wa wa wi wa!

[Kyle @ Feb 28th 2007 3:58PM]

haha when I watched the vid on UTube the related link at the end of the vid was "terminator 2: judgement day"

[G @ Feb 28th 2007 4:35PM]

No taction contact!

[Jean Pierre @ Mar 1st 2007 3:48AM]

Vous les Américains idiots, vous employez des «sans» comme si vous savez ce que vous faites. Vous devriez bien mieux être without lui.