2 October 2014
Some may
have heard that Harvard researchers are working on a robotic bee. But few have heard that there is also a
robotic fly. Who wouldn’t like a
cheerful, honey-gathering, pollinating robot bee? But why would anyone name a robot after a fly
– one of the most hated insects of all time?
To answer that question, let’s take a short walk down the robotic
version of “memory lane” and have another look at Robo-Bee
THE LONG ROAD TO
ROBO-BEE
Technologists
with Harvard’s “Micro Air Vehicles Project” are working to develop the first
robotic bee. They envision a robo-bee
with all the abilities of the organic original.
Someday, they believe their robotic honeybees will be engineered to fly
in swarms, live in artificial hives, and coordinate both their target locations
and pollination methodologies. [1]
But it will
be a long road to a robotic bee. Insects
don’t fly like birds. The wing motions
of insects are much, much more complicated.
And the robo-bee’s flight is so brief and uncontrolled that few would
recognize it as flight – other than in the most technical sense.
There is no
usable, on board, power supply, computer, or guidance technology that would
allow this robotic insect to fly. All
batteries and computers are too heavy for a robotic insect to lift. And even if both the power supply and computers
were the ideal weight, the battery wouldn’t provide anywhere near the power
needed for flight. And the computer, no
matter how light-weight, would have no software that could guide the ‘bot
through the complex movements of insect flight.
In fact, a computer small enough fit, couldn’t run any effective
software program.
And,
finally, getting airborne isn’t the biggest challenge of flight. Flying
isn’t the hard part. The hard part is
the landing. And Robo-Bee still ends every flight with a
crash.
Discouraged yet? Well, to
their credit, the would-be developers of Robo-Bee aren’t the least
discouraged. And, as modest as the current Robo-Bee’s performance may
seem, it’s an incredible achievement. Only with the persistence of the
project’s engineers have a host of seemingly impossible challenges and problems been
met and resolved.
Progress
has, and will, be made through a series of small advances over a long period of
time. So, the rumored release of a swarm
of robotic bees to replace our honeybees is far, far away. [2] It
will be a long time before the first Robo-Bee rolls off the assembly line,
flies into the fields, and begins pollinating.
ROBO-FLY?
So, what about the robotic fly? What lab is working on the “fly”
project? (“Fly project” even sounds like
sci-fi/horror, doesn’t it?) Well, the
robo-fly project also belongs to Harvard’s “Micro Air Vehicle Project”
researchers. The same researchers who
are working on Robo-Bee are, also, working on Robo-Fly.
So, what does the robo-fly have to
do with the MAV Project? Well, the
robo-fly came first and the robo-bee came second. In fact, Robo-Bee doesn’t have the wing
movements of a bee at all. Instead,
Robo-Bee has the both the wings and wing-movement of a fly! So, is Robo-Bee like some sci-fi hybrid --
part robotic bee and part robotic fly?
So, what’s with the two names?
Well, no one has said. At first, the MAV Project’s robotic creation
was called a Robo-Fly. Then, it was
called a Robo-Bee.
But, why the name change?
On the one hand, it may be a simple
question of public relations. The public
and press enjoy hearing about a cheerful robotic honeybee. The bee may be the most popular insect on
earth. After all, how can you dislike an
insect that makes something as good tasting as honey? And, when it’s not making honey, the bees are
pollinating -- making seed from which plants will grow. And those plants will produce next year’s
fruits, flowers, and agricultural harvests.
Then, there’s the fly. Who wants a metal robot that disrupts picnics
and outdoor summer activities? The fly
contaminates food with germs and irritates you by flying in your face. Do we really need a robot version to . . . do it better?
So, maybe, favorable public
attention and support are easier to come by if you’re building a robotic “bee”
instead of a robotic “fly.” Did someone
just decide, one day, to change the name from “fly” to “bee?”
If the MAV Project set out to build
a robotic insect to pollinate crops, why would anyone have called it a fly in
the first place? If it was designed to
do what a bee does, wouldn’t it have been called a bee from the beginning?
On the other hand, what if one
robotic insect has two names? What if
this robot needs two names because
the same robot has two “faces.” What if
it’s . . . more than just a robotic bee?
Maybe, because this ‘bot has another “face,” it needs a different name
to go with a different face?
ONE ROBOT WITH TWO DIFFERENT FACES
In fact, we already know that
Robo-Bee has another face. A face that
isn’t particularly bee-like. The
published reports of Harvard’s Micro
Air Vehicles Project have always suggested potential military uses for this
flying insect sized drone. So, Robo-Bee,
with some market re-positioning, becomes the world’s smallest military flying
drone. And what could be more central to
market re-positioning than re-naming?
There’s no way to be sure, but
consider this. Could the name
(fly or bee) depend on what the ‘bot does?
Look at it this way. Robo-bee is
being developed to pollinate crops - a wholesome and useful activity. Maybe the same robot, under the name
Robo-Fly, will be deployed as a spy drone -- to secretly watch and, perhaps,
eavesdrop on some unsuspecting victims.
Surveillance
is useful but, today, has developed an ugly reputation. So, when a flying drone spies on “the enemy,”
it’s good. When it spies on your neighbor, it’s a
subject for public debate. When it spies
on you, . . . it’s outright evil.
So, when
this robot is being used as A friendly pollinator, it will be named after a
cheerful “bee.” But, when the same robot
starts looking over your shoulder, it’ll be named after an unpleasant
“fly.”
ANOTHER QUESTION
Harvard’s MAV
Project is well funded. The Project
objectives include the development of sensors to function as eyes and ears. These “senses” will allow the robotic bees to
form colonies and fly in true swarms.
But is that
enough to make a bee? Right now, the
UK’s Green Brain Project is tackling what, in the end, may be the biggest
problem of all – the robotic bee’s brain.
It’s not enough to form a colony or fly in swarms. A working bee ‘bot would have to be able to
“see” and “recognize” a wide variety of flowers. Every landing and honey extraction would pose
a series of unique issues that would have to be resolved. So, if Robo-Bee is to, actually, do what a
bee does, it must be able to deal with an endless series of individually
different situations. Like it or not, if
this robot is to act like a bee, it
must be able to think like a
bee.
The
well-funded MAV Project’s objectives extend to a wide variety of bee behaviors
including colony formation and flying in swarms, but the objectives fall short
of what our Robo-Bee would need to replace the honeybee. The UK’s Green Brain Project picks up were
the MAV Project leaves off.
The Green
Project researchers are not trying to tackle the replication of the honeybee’s
entire brain. Instead, they are focusing on only two functions: vision
and the sense of smell.
But developing
cognitive models of even just sight and smell is more than challenging.
To duplicate even part of an actual bee’s brain, you need to study an actual
bee or, at least, work with someone who has. That someone is Martin
Giurfa of Toulouse, “an expert in all aspects of bee brain anatomy, physiology,
and bee cognition and behavior.”
The
ultimate goal is a robotic bee that can detect particular odors or particular
flowers. But, more immediately, the researcher are hoping to develop
computer models of these processes that, someday, will be downloaded directly
into the computerized “brain” of a robotic bee.
However,
the description above understates and ambition of one aspect of this
project. The researchers are attempting to develop models with true
artificial intelligence. That is, they are attempting to develop a
computerized intelligence that will allow a robotic honeybee to perform certain
basic tasks without pre-programmed instructions. In other words, these robotic bees would be
able to think.
There’s no
getting around the need for at least a basic form of artificial intelligence if
the robotic honeybee is to do what a bee does. But the Green Brain Project
is not as well funded as Harvard’s MAV Project.
One has to
ask. Is there something special about
insect sized robots that can coordinate their individual movements even as they
fly together in large groups? Is there
something special about small insect sized robots that live together as a
colony and can leave their central base of operations in flying swarms? And, is there something less interesting about a robotic bee that can pollinate crops in a
field?
If you
consider the levels of project funding, you have wonder if the some abilities
of the robo-bee are more interesting than others – at least to those funding
the project. Could there be an
“un-bee-like” objective behind the development of Robo-Bee? Harvard researchers may be aiming straight at
a robo-bee. But what are the goals of
those providing the funds for the development of Robo-Bee?
One must
ask: Could the U.S. Department of
Defense be interested in developing a mini-drones that could live in colonies
and fly in swarms . . . like bees. And
could the DOD be less interested in whether or not these bee ‘bots can
pollinate? At least, the U.S.Air Force has revealed that “a swarm of miniature flying
robots” is on its “wish list.” [4]
But, then,
why all the talk about bees? Not that
anyone specifically planned or intended a . . .
subterfuge. However, a robotic
“bee” would tend to attract favorable attention. But a swarm of Robo-Flies that might, one
day, be used to chase you or me? That’s
a “less comfortable” vision of the future.
There’s
something almost humorous in the thought that the name “Robo-Bee” might turn
out to be a robotic “red herring” – intended or not. Even the cheerful vision
of a robotic bee has stirred intense interest and, even
controversy.
Those
fearing a bee apocalypse and resulting global starvation are anxiously awaiting
the development of Robo-Bee. In the
growing world of super-agriculture, the shakers and movers behind California’s
vast (and vastly profitable) almond industry are attentively examining their
balance sheets trying to factor in the costs and benefits of Robo-Bee.
Meanwhile, the U.S. Department
of Defense may be waiting quietly and patiently by the assembly line. Waiting until the bee robot can establish
bases (colonies) and form armies (fly in swarms). Then, the agency will quickly and quietly
snatch the “unfinished” Robo-Bee off that assembly line. Our Robo-Bee will find itself drafted for
military service even before it can be developed into a pollinator.
CONCLUSION
So, maybe,
this robotic insect is a cheerful “bee” when it’s pollinating. But, when the same robot starts looking over
your shoulder, it’s an unpleasant “fly.”
Just imagine what they would have called this same ‘bot if it were adapted,
not just to listen, but to attack? And,
then, read the next post: “The Great Robo-Mosquito Hoax”
4 October 2014
GCLM5444HOxenia
Next Post on 18
October 2014: “The Great
Robo-Mosquito Hoax”
No comments:
Post a Comment