Adaptive Form
Adapting the Form of Robots
The conditions the robots will encounter are unknown. Their programming must include a wide variety of adaptive behaviors. The robots must have enough autonomy and intelligence to choose behaviors strategically from an on-board “bag of tricks.”
Beyond adaptive behavior there is adaptive form or structure. If we study the different kinds of robots sent to the Moon before human exploration began there, we can trace an adaptation of form.
At first aerospace engineers knew very little about surface conditions on the Moon. Astronomers could see that the Moon’s surface is covered with craters. From the rain of meteors and meteorites that fall into the Earth’s atmosphere, they rightly predicted that the Moon’s airless surface must be covered with dust. They did not know how deep the dust was. Also, they could not predict if the layers of dust were stable. What if the layers slid easily over one another? Could astronauts walk upright on the Moon? Or would they slip and fall, and sink down into a layer of dust so thick it would swallow them? One cannot send people, no matter how brave, to encounter extreme, unknown conditions. It was sensible first to send robots.
Aerospace engineers doomed to destruction on arrival the first robots they sent to the Moon. The robots were simply automatic cameras that looked forward and took pictures as they approached the Moon. Each successive television frame came from a closer range, showing a smaller and smaller area in greater and greater detail. The last frame was always incomplete because the crash ended the transmission.
The next series of robots had considerably more structure. NASA designed them as three-legged vehicles with large footpads, and endowed them with a rocket motor that fired between their legs. This arrangement allowed the robots to make soft landings on the Moon. They had no wheels or moveable leg joints and couldn’t travel anywhere. They couldn’t even level themselves if one of their feet happened to land on a rock.
All the robots carried a camera. NASA mounted the camera on swivels to take photos in almost any direction. The camera could only rotate and look up and down through a narrow slit, but the operators pasted the pictures together into a complete panorama. Especially, NASA’s engineers made sure they could focus the camera on the robot’s footpads.
The first footpads were excessively large because no one knew how big they had to be to stay on top of the dust. The pictures of the footpads were very important. Engineers studied the pictures to find out how deep the pads sank into the dust as they bore the weight of the robot.
NASA designed the footpads for the manned lunar landing module and the astronauts’ shoes in accordance with earlier findings. The later footpads were smaller than earlier ones in relation to the weight they had to bear. The engineers had a better idea of just how large the footpads had to be. NASA did not make the footpads excessively large because the engineers wanted to reduce the weight of the footpads themselves. The savings in weight permitted adding extra instruments and capabilities to the mission payload.
From this story we can see that aerospace engineers modified the form or structure of the robots in accordance with new purposes and better knowledge of conditions. This is creative design. Let’s note, however, that it was the designers who had the creativity. None of the robots that reached the Moon had either sufficient artificial intelligence or mechanical capability to adapt its form to unforeseen conditions. Once the robots found the terrain stable, none of them could take off its oversize footpads and use the unnecessary material for some other purpose.
Aerospace engineers have to develop robots to explore unknown environments before human exploration can begin. A design goal is always to program in adaptive behavior, especially as the exploration sites become more and more remote and timely consultation with Earth-bound controllers becomes impossible. A higher design goal would be to provide adaptive structure, but at present that is still a science fiction dream.
However, the farther we send robots, the more we may have to think of things like that. We would like to find ways of programming adaptive behavior and even adaptive form. That will be creative design at its best.
Beyond adaptive behavior there is adaptive form or structure. If we study the different kinds of robots sent to the Moon before human exploration began there, we can trace an adaptation of form.
At first aerospace engineers knew very little about surface conditions on the Moon. Astronomers could see that the Moon’s surface is covered with craters. From the rain of meteors and meteorites that fall into the Earth’s atmosphere, they rightly predicted that the Moon’s airless surface must be covered with dust. They did not know how deep the dust was. Also, they could not predict if the layers of dust were stable. What if the layers slid easily over one another? Could astronauts walk upright on the Moon? Or would they slip and fall, and sink down into a layer of dust so thick it would swallow them? One cannot send people, no matter how brave, to encounter extreme, unknown conditions. It was sensible first to send robots.
Aerospace engineers doomed to destruction on arrival the first robots they sent to the Moon. The robots were simply automatic cameras that looked forward and took pictures as they approached the Moon. Each successive television frame came from a closer range, showing a smaller and smaller area in greater and greater detail. The last frame was always incomplete because the crash ended the transmission.
The next series of robots had considerably more structure. NASA designed them as three-legged vehicles with large footpads, and endowed them with a rocket motor that fired between their legs. This arrangement allowed the robots to make soft landings on the Moon. They had no wheels or moveable leg joints and couldn’t travel anywhere. They couldn’t even level themselves if one of their feet happened to land on a rock.
All the robots carried a camera. NASA mounted the camera on swivels to take photos in almost any direction. The camera could only rotate and look up and down through a narrow slit, but the operators pasted the pictures together into a complete panorama. Especially, NASA’s engineers made sure they could focus the camera on the robot’s footpads.
The first footpads were excessively large because no one knew how big they had to be to stay on top of the dust. The pictures of the footpads were very important. Engineers studied the pictures to find out how deep the pads sank into the dust as they bore the weight of the robot.
NASA designed the footpads for the manned lunar landing module and the astronauts’ shoes in accordance with earlier findings. The later footpads were smaller than earlier ones in relation to the weight they had to bear. The engineers had a better idea of just how large the footpads had to be. NASA did not make the footpads excessively large because the engineers wanted to reduce the weight of the footpads themselves. The savings in weight permitted adding extra instruments and capabilities to the mission payload.
From this story we can see that aerospace engineers modified the form or structure of the robots in accordance with new purposes and better knowledge of conditions. This is creative design. Let’s note, however, that it was the designers who had the creativity. None of the robots that reached the Moon had either sufficient artificial intelligence or mechanical capability to adapt its form to unforeseen conditions. Once the robots found the terrain stable, none of them could take off its oversize footpads and use the unnecessary material for some other purpose.
Aerospace engineers have to develop robots to explore unknown environments before human exploration can begin. A design goal is always to program in adaptive behavior, especially as the exploration sites become more and more remote and timely consultation with Earth-bound controllers becomes impossible. A higher design goal would be to provide adaptive structure, but at present that is still a science fiction dream.
However, the farther we send robots, the more we may have to think of things like that. We would like to find ways of programming adaptive behavior and even adaptive form. That will be creative design at its best.
The Origin of Adaptive Form Variation
Darwin was a creationist. He submitted to the scientific world the idea that God may have used the mechanism of adaptive form variation to create the different species. In Darwin’s vision, small adaptive form variations might accumulate in some individuals of one species until they became a new species.
The confirmed biological examples of adaptive variation under environmental pressure are evidence for highly creative design programmed into nature. But how did it become programmed? Were random mutation and survival of the fittest enough to establish a capability that engineers cannot yet imitate, or did a great, pre-existing intelligence design all life forms?
The confirmed biological examples of adaptive variation under environmental pressure are evidence for highly creative design programmed into nature. But how did it become programmed? Were random mutation and survival of the fittest enough to establish a capability that engineers cannot yet imitate, or did a great, pre-existing intelligence design all life forms?