rlm@425
|
1 #+title: =CORTEX=
|
rlm@425
|
2 #+author: Robert McIntyre
|
rlm@425
|
3 #+email: rlm@mit.edu
|
rlm@425
|
4 #+description: Using embodied AI to facilitate Artificial Imagination.
|
rlm@425
|
5 #+keywords: AI, clojure, embodiment
|
rlm@451
|
6 #+LaTeX_CLASS_OPTIONS: [nofloat]
|
rlm@422
|
7
|
rlm@453
|
8 * Empathy and Embodiment as problem solving strategies
|
rlm@437
|
9
|
rlm@437
|
10 By the end of this thesis, you will have seen a novel approach to
|
rlm@437
|
11 interpreting video using embodiment and empathy. You will have also
|
rlm@437
|
12 seen one way to efficiently implement empathy for embodied
|
rlm@447
|
13 creatures. Finally, you will become familiar with =CORTEX=, a system
|
rlm@447
|
14 for designing and simulating creatures with rich senses, which you
|
rlm@447
|
15 may choose to use in your own research.
|
rlm@437
|
16
|
rlm@441
|
17 This is the core vision of my thesis: That one of the important ways
|
rlm@441
|
18 in which we understand others is by imagining ourselves in their
|
rlm@441
|
19 position and emphatically feeling experiences relative to our own
|
rlm@441
|
20 bodies. By understanding events in terms of our own previous
|
rlm@441
|
21 corporeal experience, we greatly constrain the possibilities of what
|
rlm@441
|
22 would otherwise be an unwieldy exponential search. This extra
|
rlm@441
|
23 constraint can be the difference between easily understanding what
|
rlm@441
|
24 is happening in a video and being completely lost in a sea of
|
rlm@441
|
25 incomprehensible color and movement.
|
rlm@435
|
26
|
rlm@436
|
27 ** Recognizing actions in video is extremely difficult
|
rlm@437
|
28
|
rlm@447
|
29 Consider for example the problem of determining what is happening
|
rlm@447
|
30 in a video of which this is one frame:
|
rlm@437
|
31
|
rlm@441
|
32 #+caption: A cat drinking some water. Identifying this action is
|
rlm@441
|
33 #+caption: beyond the state of the art for computers.
|
rlm@441
|
34 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 7cm
|
rlm@441
|
35 [[./images/cat-drinking.jpg]]
|
rlm@441
|
36
|
rlm@441
|
37 It is currently impossible for any computer program to reliably
|
rlm@447
|
38 label such a video as ``drinking''. And rightly so -- it is a very
|
rlm@441
|
39 hard problem! What features can you describe in terms of low level
|
rlm@441
|
40 functions of pixels that can even begin to describe at a high level
|
rlm@441
|
41 what is happening here?
|
rlm@437
|
42
|
rlm@447
|
43 Or suppose that you are building a program that recognizes chairs.
|
rlm@448
|
44 How could you ``see'' the chair in figure \ref{hidden-chair}?
|
rlm@441
|
45
|
rlm@441
|
46 #+caption: The chair in this image is quite obvious to humans, but I
|
rlm@448
|
47 #+caption: doubt that any modern computer vision program can find it.
|
rlm@441
|
48 #+name: hidden-chair
|
rlm@441
|
49 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 10cm
|
rlm@441
|
50 [[./images/fat-person-sitting-at-desk.jpg]]
|
rlm@441
|
51
|
rlm@441
|
52 Finally, how is it that you can easily tell the difference between
|
rlm@441
|
53 how the girls /muscles/ are working in figure \ref{girl}?
|
rlm@441
|
54
|
rlm@441
|
55 #+caption: The mysterious ``common sense'' appears here as you are able
|
rlm@441
|
56 #+caption: to discern the difference in how the girl's arm muscles
|
rlm@441
|
57 #+caption: are activated between the two images.
|
rlm@441
|
58 #+name: girl
|
rlm@448
|
59 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 7cm
|
rlm@441
|
60 [[./images/wall-push.png]]
|
rlm@437
|
61
|
rlm@441
|
62 Each of these examples tells us something about what might be going
|
rlm@441
|
63 on in our minds as we easily solve these recognition problems.
|
rlm@441
|
64
|
rlm@441
|
65 The hidden chairs show us that we are strongly triggered by cues
|
rlm@447
|
66 relating to the position of human bodies, and that we can determine
|
rlm@447
|
67 the overall physical configuration of a human body even if much of
|
rlm@447
|
68 that body is occluded.
|
rlm@437
|
69
|
rlm@441
|
70 The picture of the girl pushing against the wall tells us that we
|
rlm@441
|
71 have common sense knowledge about the kinetics of our own bodies.
|
rlm@441
|
72 We know well how our muscles would have to work to maintain us in
|
rlm@441
|
73 most positions, and we can easily project this self-knowledge to
|
rlm@441
|
74 imagined positions triggered by images of the human body.
|
rlm@441
|
75
|
rlm@441
|
76 ** =EMPATH= neatly solves recognition problems
|
rlm@441
|
77
|
rlm@441
|
78 I propose a system that can express the types of recognition
|
rlm@441
|
79 problems above in a form amenable to computation. It is split into
|
rlm@441
|
80 four parts:
|
rlm@441
|
81
|
rlm@448
|
82 - Free/Guided Play :: The creature moves around and experiences the
|
rlm@448
|
83 world through its unique perspective. Many otherwise
|
rlm@448
|
84 complicated actions are easily described in the language of a
|
rlm@448
|
85 full suite of body-centered, rich senses. For example,
|
rlm@448
|
86 drinking is the feeling of water sliding down your throat, and
|
rlm@448
|
87 cooling your insides. It's often accompanied by bringing your
|
rlm@448
|
88 hand close to your face, or bringing your face close to water.
|
rlm@448
|
89 Sitting down is the feeling of bending your knees, activating
|
rlm@448
|
90 your quadriceps, then feeling a surface with your bottom and
|
rlm@448
|
91 relaxing your legs. These body-centered action descriptions
|
rlm@448
|
92 can be either learned or hard coded.
|
rlm@448
|
93 - Posture Imitation :: When trying to interpret a video or image,
|
rlm@448
|
94 the creature takes a model of itself and aligns it with
|
rlm@448
|
95 whatever it sees. This alignment can even cross species, as
|
rlm@448
|
96 when humans try to align themselves with things like ponies,
|
rlm@448
|
97 dogs, or other humans with a different body type.
|
rlm@448
|
98 - Empathy :: The alignment triggers associations with
|
rlm@448
|
99 sensory data from prior experiences. For example, the
|
rlm@448
|
100 alignment itself easily maps to proprioceptive data. Any
|
rlm@448
|
101 sounds or obvious skin contact in the video can to a lesser
|
rlm@448
|
102 extent trigger previous experience. Segments of previous
|
rlm@448
|
103 experiences are stitched together to form a coherent and
|
rlm@448
|
104 complete sensory portrait of the scene.
|
rlm@448
|
105 - Recognition :: With the scene described in terms of first
|
rlm@448
|
106 person sensory events, the creature can now run its
|
rlm@447
|
107 action-identification programs on this synthesized sensory
|
rlm@447
|
108 data, just as it would if it were actually experiencing the
|
rlm@447
|
109 scene first-hand. If previous experience has been accurately
|
rlm@447
|
110 retrieved, and if it is analogous enough to the scene, then
|
rlm@447
|
111 the creature will correctly identify the action in the scene.
|
rlm@447
|
112
|
rlm@441
|
113 For example, I think humans are able to label the cat video as
|
rlm@447
|
114 ``drinking'' because they imagine /themselves/ as the cat, and
|
rlm@441
|
115 imagine putting their face up against a stream of water and
|
rlm@441
|
116 sticking out their tongue. In that imagined world, they can feel
|
rlm@441
|
117 the cool water hitting their tongue, and feel the water entering
|
rlm@447
|
118 their body, and are able to recognize that /feeling/ as drinking.
|
rlm@447
|
119 So, the label of the action is not really in the pixels of the
|
rlm@447
|
120 image, but is found clearly in a simulation inspired by those
|
rlm@447
|
121 pixels. An imaginative system, having been trained on drinking and
|
rlm@447
|
122 non-drinking examples and learning that the most important
|
rlm@447
|
123 component of drinking is the feeling of water sliding down one's
|
rlm@447
|
124 throat, would analyze a video of a cat drinking in the following
|
rlm@447
|
125 manner:
|
rlm@441
|
126
|
rlm@447
|
127 1. Create a physical model of the video by putting a ``fuzzy''
|
rlm@447
|
128 model of its own body in place of the cat. Possibly also create
|
rlm@447
|
129 a simulation of the stream of water.
|
rlm@441
|
130
|
rlm@441
|
131 2. Play out this simulated scene and generate imagined sensory
|
rlm@441
|
132 experience. This will include relevant muscle contractions, a
|
rlm@441
|
133 close up view of the stream from the cat's perspective, and most
|
rlm@441
|
134 importantly, the imagined feeling of water entering the
|
rlm@443
|
135 mouth. The imagined sensory experience can come from a
|
rlm@441
|
136 simulation of the event, but can also be pattern-matched from
|
rlm@441
|
137 previous, similar embodied experience.
|
rlm@441
|
138
|
rlm@441
|
139 3. The action is now easily identified as drinking by the sense of
|
rlm@441
|
140 taste alone. The other senses (such as the tongue moving in and
|
rlm@441
|
141 out) help to give plausibility to the simulated action. Note that
|
rlm@441
|
142 the sense of vision, while critical in creating the simulation,
|
rlm@441
|
143 is not critical for identifying the action from the simulation.
|
rlm@441
|
144
|
rlm@441
|
145 For the chair examples, the process is even easier:
|
rlm@441
|
146
|
rlm@441
|
147 1. Align a model of your body to the person in the image.
|
rlm@441
|
148
|
rlm@441
|
149 2. Generate proprioceptive sensory data from this alignment.
|
rlm@437
|
150
|
rlm@441
|
151 3. Use the imagined proprioceptive data as a key to lookup related
|
rlm@441
|
152 sensory experience associated with that particular proproceptive
|
rlm@441
|
153 feeling.
|
rlm@437
|
154
|
rlm@443
|
155 4. Retrieve the feeling of your bottom resting on a surface, your
|
rlm@443
|
156 knees bent, and your leg muscles relaxed.
|
rlm@437
|
157
|
rlm@441
|
158 5. This sensory information is consistent with the =sitting?=
|
rlm@441
|
159 sensory predicate, so you (and the entity in the image) must be
|
rlm@441
|
160 sitting.
|
rlm@440
|
161
|
rlm@441
|
162 6. There must be a chair-like object since you are sitting.
|
rlm@440
|
163
|
rlm@441
|
164 Empathy offers yet another alternative to the age-old AI
|
rlm@441
|
165 representation question: ``What is a chair?'' --- A chair is the
|
rlm@441
|
166 feeling of sitting.
|
rlm@441
|
167
|
rlm@441
|
168 My program, =EMPATH= uses this empathic problem solving technique
|
rlm@441
|
169 to interpret the actions of a simple, worm-like creature.
|
rlm@437
|
170
|
rlm@441
|
171 #+caption: The worm performs many actions during free play such as
|
rlm@441
|
172 #+caption: curling, wiggling, and resting.
|
rlm@441
|
173 #+name: worm-intro
|
rlm@446
|
174 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 15cm
|
rlm@445
|
175 [[./images/worm-intro-white.png]]
|
rlm@437
|
176
|
rlm@447
|
177 #+caption: =EMPATH= recognized and classified each of these poses by
|
rlm@447
|
178 #+caption: inferring the complete sensory experience from
|
rlm@447
|
179 #+caption: proprioceptive data.
|
rlm@441
|
180 #+name: worm-recognition-intro
|
rlm@446
|
181 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 15cm
|
rlm@445
|
182 [[./images/worm-poses.png]]
|
rlm@441
|
183
|
rlm@441
|
184 One powerful advantage of empathic problem solving is that it
|
rlm@441
|
185 factors the action recognition problem into two easier problems. To
|
rlm@441
|
186 use empathy, you need an /aligner/, which takes the video and a
|
rlm@441
|
187 model of your body, and aligns the model with the video. Then, you
|
rlm@441
|
188 need a /recognizer/, which uses the aligned model to interpret the
|
rlm@441
|
189 action. The power in this method lies in the fact that you describe
|
rlm@448
|
190 all actions form a body-centered viewpoint. You are less tied to
|
rlm@447
|
191 the particulars of any visual representation of the actions. If you
|
rlm@441
|
192 teach the system what ``running'' is, and you have a good enough
|
rlm@441
|
193 aligner, the system will from then on be able to recognize running
|
rlm@441
|
194 from any point of view, even strange points of view like above or
|
rlm@441
|
195 underneath the runner. This is in contrast to action recognition
|
rlm@448
|
196 schemes that try to identify actions using a non-embodied approach.
|
rlm@448
|
197 If these systems learn about running as viewed from the side, they
|
rlm@448
|
198 will not automatically be able to recognize running from any other
|
rlm@448
|
199 viewpoint.
|
rlm@441
|
200
|
rlm@441
|
201 Another powerful advantage is that using the language of multiple
|
rlm@441
|
202 body-centered rich senses to describe body-centerd actions offers a
|
rlm@441
|
203 massive boost in descriptive capability. Consider how difficult it
|
rlm@441
|
204 would be to compose a set of HOG filters to describe the action of
|
rlm@447
|
205 a simple worm-creature ``curling'' so that its head touches its
|
rlm@447
|
206 tail, and then behold the simplicity of describing thus action in a
|
rlm@441
|
207 language designed for the task (listing \ref{grand-circle-intro}):
|
rlm@441
|
208
|
rlm@446
|
209 #+caption: Body-centerd actions are best expressed in a body-centered
|
rlm@446
|
210 #+caption: language. This code detects when the worm has curled into a
|
rlm@446
|
211 #+caption: full circle. Imagine how you would replicate this functionality
|
rlm@446
|
212 #+caption: using low-level pixel features such as HOG filters!
|
rlm@446
|
213 #+name: grand-circle-intro
|
rlm@452
|
214 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
215 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@446
|
216 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@446
|
217 (defn grand-circle?
|
rlm@446
|
218 "Does the worm form a majestic circle (one end touching the other)?"
|
rlm@446
|
219 [experiences]
|
rlm@446
|
220 (and (curled? experiences)
|
rlm@446
|
221 (let [worm-touch (:touch (peek experiences))
|
rlm@446
|
222 tail-touch (worm-touch 0)
|
rlm@446
|
223 head-touch (worm-touch 4)]
|
rlm@446
|
224 (and (< 0.55 (contact worm-segment-bottom-tip tail-touch))
|
rlm@446
|
225 (< 0.55 (contact worm-segment-top-tip head-touch))))))
|
rlm@446
|
226 #+end_src
|
rlm@446
|
227 #+end_listing
|
rlm@446
|
228
|
rlm@435
|
229
|
rlm@449
|
230 ** =CORTEX= is a toolkit for building sensate creatures
|
rlm@435
|
231
|
rlm@448
|
232 I built =CORTEX= to be a general AI research platform for doing
|
rlm@448
|
233 experiments involving multiple rich senses and a wide variety and
|
rlm@448
|
234 number of creatures. I intend it to be useful as a library for many
|
rlm@448
|
235 more projects than just this one. =CORTEX= was necessary to meet a
|
rlm@448
|
236 need among AI researchers at CSAIL and beyond, which is that people
|
rlm@448
|
237 often will invent neat ideas that are best expressed in the
|
rlm@448
|
238 language of creatures and senses, but in order to explore those
|
rlm@448
|
239 ideas they must first build a platform in which they can create
|
rlm@448
|
240 simulated creatures with rich senses! There are many ideas that
|
rlm@448
|
241 would be simple to execute (such as =EMPATH=), but attached to them
|
rlm@448
|
242 is the multi-month effort to make a good creature simulator. Often,
|
rlm@448
|
243 that initial investment of time proves to be too much, and the
|
rlm@448
|
244 project must make do with a lesser environment.
|
rlm@435
|
245
|
rlm@448
|
246 =CORTEX= is well suited as an environment for embodied AI research
|
rlm@448
|
247 for three reasons:
|
rlm@448
|
248
|
rlm@448
|
249 - You can create new creatures using Blender, a popular 3D modeling
|
rlm@448
|
250 program. Each sense can be specified using special blender nodes
|
rlm@448
|
251 with biologically inspired paramaters. You need not write any
|
rlm@448
|
252 code to create a creature, and can use a wide library of
|
rlm@448
|
253 pre-existing blender models as a base for your own creatures.
|
rlm@448
|
254
|
rlm@448
|
255 - =CORTEX= implements a wide variety of senses, including touch,
|
rlm@448
|
256 proprioception, vision, hearing, and muscle tension. Complicated
|
rlm@448
|
257 senses like touch, and vision involve multiple sensory elements
|
rlm@448
|
258 embedded in a 2D surface. You have complete control over the
|
rlm@448
|
259 distribution of these sensor elements through the use of simple
|
rlm@448
|
260 png image files. In particular, =CORTEX= implements more
|
rlm@448
|
261 comprehensive hearing than any other creature simulation system
|
rlm@448
|
262 available.
|
rlm@448
|
263
|
rlm@448
|
264 - =CORTEX= supports any number of creatures and any number of
|
rlm@448
|
265 senses. Time in =CORTEX= dialates so that the simulated creatures
|
rlm@448
|
266 always precieve a perfectly smooth flow of time, regardless of
|
rlm@448
|
267 the actual computational load.
|
rlm@448
|
268
|
rlm@448
|
269 =CORTEX= is built on top of =jMonkeyEngine3=, which is a video game
|
rlm@448
|
270 engine designed to create cross-platform 3D desktop games. =CORTEX=
|
rlm@448
|
271 is mainly written in clojure, a dialect of =LISP= that runs on the
|
rlm@448
|
272 java virtual machine (JVM). The API for creating and simulating
|
rlm@449
|
273 creatures and senses is entirely expressed in clojure, though many
|
rlm@449
|
274 senses are implemented at the layer of jMonkeyEngine or below. For
|
rlm@449
|
275 example, for the sense of hearing I use a layer of clojure code on
|
rlm@449
|
276 top of a layer of java JNI bindings that drive a layer of =C++=
|
rlm@449
|
277 code which implements a modified version of =OpenAL= to support
|
rlm@449
|
278 multiple listeners. =CORTEX= is the only simulation environment
|
rlm@449
|
279 that I know of that can support multiple entities that can each
|
rlm@449
|
280 hear the world from their own perspective. Other senses also
|
rlm@449
|
281 require a small layer of Java code. =CORTEX= also uses =bullet=, a
|
rlm@449
|
282 physics simulator written in =C=.
|
rlm@448
|
283
|
rlm@448
|
284 #+caption: Here is the worm from above modeled in Blender, a free
|
rlm@448
|
285 #+caption: 3D-modeling program. Senses and joints are described
|
rlm@448
|
286 #+caption: using special nodes in Blender.
|
rlm@448
|
287 #+name: worm-recognition-intro
|
rlm@448
|
288 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 12cm
|
rlm@448
|
289 [[./images/blender-worm.png]]
|
rlm@448
|
290
|
rlm@449
|
291 Here are some thing I anticipate that =CORTEX= might be used for:
|
rlm@449
|
292
|
rlm@449
|
293 - exploring new ideas about sensory integration
|
rlm@449
|
294 - distributed communication among swarm creatures
|
rlm@449
|
295 - self-learning using free exploration,
|
rlm@449
|
296 - evolutionary algorithms involving creature construction
|
rlm@449
|
297 - exploration of exoitic senses and effectors that are not possible
|
rlm@449
|
298 in the real world (such as telekenisis or a semantic sense)
|
rlm@449
|
299 - imagination using subworlds
|
rlm@449
|
300
|
rlm@451
|
301 During one test with =CORTEX=, I created 3,000 creatures each with
|
rlm@448
|
302 their own independent senses and ran them all at only 1/80 real
|
rlm@448
|
303 time. In another test, I created a detailed model of my own hand,
|
rlm@448
|
304 equipped with a realistic distribution of touch (more sensitive at
|
rlm@448
|
305 the fingertips), as well as eyes and ears, and it ran at around 1/4
|
rlm@451
|
306 real time.
|
rlm@448
|
307
|
rlm@451
|
308 #+BEGIN_LaTeX
|
rlm@449
|
309 \begin{sidewaysfigure}
|
rlm@449
|
310 \includegraphics[width=9.5in]{images/full-hand.png}
|
rlm@451
|
311 \caption{
|
rlm@451
|
312 I modeled my own right hand in Blender and rigged it with all the
|
rlm@451
|
313 senses that {\tt CORTEX} supports. My simulated hand has a
|
rlm@451
|
314 biologically inspired distribution of touch sensors. The senses are
|
rlm@451
|
315 displayed on the right, and the simulation is displayed on the
|
rlm@451
|
316 left. Notice that my hand is curling its fingers, that it can see
|
rlm@451
|
317 its own finger from the eye in its palm, and that it can feel its
|
rlm@451
|
318 own thumb touching its palm.}
|
rlm@449
|
319 \end{sidewaysfigure}
|
rlm@451
|
320 #+END_LaTeX
|
rlm@448
|
321
|
rlm@437
|
322 ** Contributions
|
rlm@435
|
323
|
rlm@451
|
324 - I built =CORTEX=, a comprehensive platform for embodied AI
|
rlm@451
|
325 experiments. =CORTEX= supports many features lacking in other
|
rlm@451
|
326 systems, such proper simulation of hearing. It is easy to create
|
rlm@451
|
327 new =CORTEX= creatures using Blender, a free 3D modeling program.
|
rlm@449
|
328
|
rlm@451
|
329 - I built =EMPATH=, which uses =CORTEX= to identify the actions of
|
rlm@451
|
330 a worm-like creature using a computational model of empathy.
|
rlm@449
|
331
|
rlm@436
|
332 * Building =CORTEX=
|
rlm@435
|
333
|
rlm@436
|
334 ** To explore embodiment, we need a world, body, and senses
|
rlm@435
|
335
|
rlm@436
|
336 ** Because of Time, simulation is perferable to reality
|
rlm@435
|
337
|
rlm@436
|
338 ** Video game engines are a great starting point
|
rlm@435
|
339
|
rlm@436
|
340 ** Bodies are composed of segments connected by joints
|
rlm@435
|
341
|
rlm@436
|
342 ** Eyes reuse standard video game components
|
rlm@436
|
343
|
rlm@436
|
344 ** Hearing is hard; =CORTEX= does it right
|
rlm@436
|
345
|
rlm@436
|
346 ** Touch uses hundreds of hair-like elements
|
rlm@436
|
347
|
rlm@440
|
348 ** Proprioception is the sense that makes everything ``real''
|
rlm@436
|
349
|
rlm@436
|
350 ** Muscles are both effectors and sensors
|
rlm@436
|
351
|
rlm@436
|
352 ** =CORTEX= brings complex creatures to life!
|
rlm@436
|
353
|
rlm@436
|
354 ** =CORTEX= enables many possiblities for further research
|
rlm@435
|
355
|
rlm@435
|
356 * Empathy in a simulated worm
|
rlm@435
|
357
|
rlm@449
|
358 Here I develop a computational model of empathy, using =CORTEX= as a
|
rlm@449
|
359 base. Empathy in this context is the ability to observe another
|
rlm@449
|
360 creature and infer what sorts of sensations that creature is
|
rlm@449
|
361 feeling. My empathy algorithm involves multiple phases. First is
|
rlm@449
|
362 free-play, where the creature moves around and gains sensory
|
rlm@449
|
363 experience. From this experience I construct a representation of the
|
rlm@449
|
364 creature's sensory state space, which I call \Phi-space. Using
|
rlm@449
|
365 \Phi-space, I construct an efficient function which takes the
|
rlm@449
|
366 limited data that comes from observing another creature and enriches
|
rlm@449
|
367 it full compliment of imagined sensory data. I can then use the
|
rlm@449
|
368 imagined sensory data to recognize what the observed creature is
|
rlm@449
|
369 doing and feeling, using straightforward embodied action predicates.
|
rlm@449
|
370 This is all demonstrated with using a simple worm-like creature, and
|
rlm@449
|
371 recognizing worm-actions based on limited data.
|
rlm@449
|
372
|
rlm@449
|
373 #+caption: Here is the worm with which we will be working.
|
rlm@449
|
374 #+caption: It is composed of 5 segments. Each segment has a
|
rlm@449
|
375 #+caption: pair of extensor and flexor muscles. Each of the
|
rlm@449
|
376 #+caption: worm's four joints is a hinge joint which allows
|
rlm@451
|
377 #+caption: about 30 degrees of rotation to either side. Each segment
|
rlm@449
|
378 #+caption: of the worm is touch-capable and has a uniform
|
rlm@449
|
379 #+caption: distribution of touch sensors on each of its faces.
|
rlm@449
|
380 #+caption: Each joint has a proprioceptive sense to detect
|
rlm@449
|
381 #+caption: relative positions. The worm segments are all the
|
rlm@449
|
382 #+caption: same except for the first one, which has a much
|
rlm@449
|
383 #+caption: higher weight than the others to allow for easy
|
rlm@449
|
384 #+caption: manual motor control.
|
rlm@449
|
385 #+name: basic-worm-view
|
rlm@449
|
386 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 10cm
|
rlm@449
|
387 [[./images/basic-worm-view.png]]
|
rlm@449
|
388
|
rlm@449
|
389 #+caption: Program for reading a worm from a blender file and
|
rlm@449
|
390 #+caption: outfitting it with the senses of proprioception,
|
rlm@449
|
391 #+caption: touch, and the ability to move, as specified in the
|
rlm@449
|
392 #+caption: blender file.
|
rlm@449
|
393 #+name: get-worm
|
rlm@449
|
394 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@449
|
395 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@449
|
396 (defn worm []
|
rlm@449
|
397 (let [model (load-blender-model "Models/worm/worm.blend")]
|
rlm@449
|
398 {:body (doto model (body!))
|
rlm@449
|
399 :touch (touch! model)
|
rlm@449
|
400 :proprioception (proprioception! model)
|
rlm@449
|
401 :muscles (movement! model)}))
|
rlm@449
|
402 #+end_src
|
rlm@449
|
403 #+end_listing
|
rlm@452
|
404
|
rlm@436
|
405 ** Embodiment factors action recognition into managable parts
|
rlm@435
|
406
|
rlm@449
|
407 Using empathy, I divide the problem of action recognition into a
|
rlm@449
|
408 recognition process expressed in the language of a full compliment
|
rlm@449
|
409 of senses, and an imaganitive process that generates full sensory
|
rlm@449
|
410 data from partial sensory data. Splitting the action recognition
|
rlm@449
|
411 problem in this manner greatly reduces the total amount of work to
|
rlm@449
|
412 recognize actions: The imaganitive process is mostly just matching
|
rlm@449
|
413 previous experience, and the recognition process gets to use all
|
rlm@449
|
414 the senses to directly describe any action.
|
rlm@449
|
415
|
rlm@436
|
416 ** Action recognition is easy with a full gamut of senses
|
rlm@435
|
417
|
rlm@449
|
418 Embodied representations using multiple senses such as touch,
|
rlm@449
|
419 proprioception, and muscle tension turns out be be exceedingly
|
rlm@449
|
420 efficient at describing body-centered actions. It is the ``right
|
rlm@449
|
421 language for the job''. For example, it takes only around 5 lines
|
rlm@449
|
422 of LISP code to describe the action of ``curling'' using embodied
|
rlm@451
|
423 primitives. It takes about 10 lines to describe the seemingly
|
rlm@449
|
424 complicated action of wiggling.
|
rlm@449
|
425
|
rlm@449
|
426 The following action predicates each take a stream of sensory
|
rlm@449
|
427 experience, observe however much of it they desire, and decide
|
rlm@449
|
428 whether the worm is doing the action they describe. =curled?=
|
rlm@449
|
429 relies on proprioception, =resting?= relies on touch, =wiggling?=
|
rlm@449
|
430 relies on a fourier analysis of muscle contraction, and
|
rlm@449
|
431 =grand-circle?= relies on touch and reuses =curled?= as a gaurd.
|
rlm@449
|
432
|
rlm@449
|
433 #+caption: Program for detecting whether the worm is curled. This is the
|
rlm@449
|
434 #+caption: simplest action predicate, because it only uses the last frame
|
rlm@449
|
435 #+caption: of sensory experience, and only uses proprioceptive data. Even
|
rlm@449
|
436 #+caption: this simple predicate, however, is automatically frame
|
rlm@449
|
437 #+caption: independent and ignores vermopomorphic differences such as
|
rlm@449
|
438 #+caption: worm textures and colors.
|
rlm@449
|
439 #+name: curled
|
rlm@452
|
440 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
441 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@449
|
442 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@449
|
443 (defn curled?
|
rlm@449
|
444 "Is the worm curled up?"
|
rlm@449
|
445 [experiences]
|
rlm@449
|
446 (every?
|
rlm@449
|
447 (fn [[_ _ bend]]
|
rlm@449
|
448 (> (Math/sin bend) 0.64))
|
rlm@449
|
449 (:proprioception (peek experiences))))
|
rlm@449
|
450 #+end_src
|
rlm@449
|
451 #+end_listing
|
rlm@449
|
452
|
rlm@449
|
453 #+caption: Program for summarizing the touch information in a patch
|
rlm@449
|
454 #+caption: of skin.
|
rlm@449
|
455 #+name: touch-summary
|
rlm@452
|
456 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
457
|
rlm@452
|
458 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@449
|
459 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@449
|
460 (defn contact
|
rlm@449
|
461 "Determine how much contact a particular worm segment has with
|
rlm@449
|
462 other objects. Returns a value between 0 and 1, where 1 is full
|
rlm@449
|
463 contact and 0 is no contact."
|
rlm@449
|
464 [touch-region [coords contact :as touch]]
|
rlm@449
|
465 (-> (zipmap coords contact)
|
rlm@449
|
466 (select-keys touch-region)
|
rlm@449
|
467 (vals)
|
rlm@449
|
468 (#(map first %))
|
rlm@449
|
469 (average)
|
rlm@449
|
470 (* 10)
|
rlm@449
|
471 (- 1)
|
rlm@449
|
472 (Math/abs)))
|
rlm@449
|
473 #+end_src
|
rlm@449
|
474 #+end_listing
|
rlm@449
|
475
|
rlm@449
|
476
|
rlm@449
|
477 #+caption: Program for detecting whether the worm is at rest. This program
|
rlm@449
|
478 #+caption: uses a summary of the tactile information from the underbelly
|
rlm@449
|
479 #+caption: of the worm, and is only true if every segment is touching the
|
rlm@449
|
480 #+caption: floor. Note that this function contains no references to
|
rlm@449
|
481 #+caption: proprioction at all.
|
rlm@449
|
482 #+name: resting
|
rlm@452
|
483 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
484 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@449
|
485 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@449
|
486 (def worm-segment-bottom (rect-region [8 15] [14 22]))
|
rlm@449
|
487
|
rlm@449
|
488 (defn resting?
|
rlm@449
|
489 "Is the worm resting on the ground?"
|
rlm@449
|
490 [experiences]
|
rlm@449
|
491 (every?
|
rlm@449
|
492 (fn [touch-data]
|
rlm@449
|
493 (< 0.9 (contact worm-segment-bottom touch-data)))
|
rlm@449
|
494 (:touch (peek experiences))))
|
rlm@449
|
495 #+end_src
|
rlm@449
|
496 #+end_listing
|
rlm@449
|
497
|
rlm@449
|
498 #+caption: Program for detecting whether the worm is curled up into a
|
rlm@449
|
499 #+caption: full circle. Here the embodied approach begins to shine, as
|
rlm@449
|
500 #+caption: I am able to both use a previous action predicate (=curled?=)
|
rlm@449
|
501 #+caption: as well as the direct tactile experience of the head and tail.
|
rlm@449
|
502 #+name: grand-circle
|
rlm@452
|
503 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
504 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@449
|
505 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@449
|
506 (def worm-segment-bottom-tip (rect-region [15 15] [22 22]))
|
rlm@449
|
507
|
rlm@449
|
508 (def worm-segment-top-tip (rect-region [0 15] [7 22]))
|
rlm@449
|
509
|
rlm@449
|
510 (defn grand-circle?
|
rlm@449
|
511 "Does the worm form a majestic circle (one end touching the other)?"
|
rlm@449
|
512 [experiences]
|
rlm@449
|
513 (and (curled? experiences)
|
rlm@449
|
514 (let [worm-touch (:touch (peek experiences))
|
rlm@449
|
515 tail-touch (worm-touch 0)
|
rlm@449
|
516 head-touch (worm-touch 4)]
|
rlm@449
|
517 (and (< 0.55 (contact worm-segment-bottom-tip tail-touch))
|
rlm@449
|
518 (< 0.55 (contact worm-segment-top-tip head-touch))))))
|
rlm@449
|
519 #+end_src
|
rlm@449
|
520 #+end_listing
|
rlm@449
|
521
|
rlm@449
|
522
|
rlm@449
|
523 #+caption: Program for detecting whether the worm has been wiggling for
|
rlm@449
|
524 #+caption: the last few frames. It uses a fourier analysis of the muscle
|
rlm@449
|
525 #+caption: contractions of the worm's tail to determine wiggling. This is
|
rlm@449
|
526 #+caption: signigicant because there is no particular frame that clearly
|
rlm@449
|
527 #+caption: indicates that the worm is wiggling --- only when multiple frames
|
rlm@449
|
528 #+caption: are analyzed together is the wiggling revealed. Defining
|
rlm@449
|
529 #+caption: wiggling this way also gives the worm an opportunity to learn
|
rlm@449
|
530 #+caption: and recognize ``frustrated wiggling'', where the worm tries to
|
rlm@449
|
531 #+caption: wiggle but can't. Frustrated wiggling is very visually different
|
rlm@449
|
532 #+caption: from actual wiggling, but this definition gives it to us for free.
|
rlm@449
|
533 #+name: wiggling
|
rlm@452
|
534 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
535 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@449
|
536 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@449
|
537 (defn fft [nums]
|
rlm@449
|
538 (map
|
rlm@449
|
539 #(.getReal %)
|
rlm@449
|
540 (.transform
|
rlm@449
|
541 (FastFourierTransformer. DftNormalization/STANDARD)
|
rlm@449
|
542 (double-array nums) TransformType/FORWARD)))
|
rlm@449
|
543
|
rlm@449
|
544 (def indexed (partial map-indexed vector))
|
rlm@449
|
545
|
rlm@449
|
546 (defn max-indexed [s]
|
rlm@449
|
547 (first (sort-by (comp - second) (indexed s))))
|
rlm@449
|
548
|
rlm@449
|
549 (defn wiggling?
|
rlm@449
|
550 "Is the worm wiggling?"
|
rlm@449
|
551 [experiences]
|
rlm@449
|
552 (let [analysis-interval 0x40]
|
rlm@449
|
553 (when (> (count experiences) analysis-interval)
|
rlm@449
|
554 (let [a-flex 3
|
rlm@449
|
555 a-ex 2
|
rlm@449
|
556 muscle-activity
|
rlm@449
|
557 (map :muscle (vector:last-n experiences analysis-interval))
|
rlm@449
|
558 base-activity
|
rlm@449
|
559 (map #(- (% a-flex) (% a-ex)) muscle-activity)]
|
rlm@449
|
560 (= 2
|
rlm@449
|
561 (first
|
rlm@449
|
562 (max-indexed
|
rlm@449
|
563 (map #(Math/abs %)
|
rlm@449
|
564 (take 20 (fft base-activity))))))))))
|
rlm@449
|
565 #+end_src
|
rlm@449
|
566 #+end_listing
|
rlm@449
|
567
|
rlm@449
|
568 With these action predicates, I can now recognize the actions of
|
rlm@449
|
569 the worm while it is moving under my control and I have access to
|
rlm@449
|
570 all the worm's senses.
|
rlm@449
|
571
|
rlm@449
|
572 #+caption: Use the action predicates defined earlier to report on
|
rlm@449
|
573 #+caption: what the worm is doing while in simulation.
|
rlm@449
|
574 #+name: report-worm-activity
|
rlm@452
|
575 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
576 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@449
|
577 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@449
|
578 (defn debug-experience
|
rlm@449
|
579 [experiences text]
|
rlm@449
|
580 (cond
|
rlm@449
|
581 (grand-circle? experiences) (.setText text "Grand Circle")
|
rlm@449
|
582 (curled? experiences) (.setText text "Curled")
|
rlm@449
|
583 (wiggling? experiences) (.setText text "Wiggling")
|
rlm@449
|
584 (resting? experiences) (.setText text "Resting")))
|
rlm@449
|
585 #+end_src
|
rlm@449
|
586 #+end_listing
|
rlm@449
|
587
|
rlm@449
|
588 #+caption: Using =debug-experience=, the body-centered predicates
|
rlm@449
|
589 #+caption: work together to classify the behaviour of the worm.
|
rlm@451
|
590 #+caption: the predicates are operating with access to the worm's
|
rlm@451
|
591 #+caption: full sensory data.
|
rlm@449
|
592 #+name: basic-worm-view
|
rlm@449
|
593 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 10cm
|
rlm@449
|
594 [[./images/worm-identify-init.png]]
|
rlm@449
|
595
|
rlm@449
|
596 These action predicates satisfy the recognition requirement of an
|
rlm@451
|
597 empathic recognition system. There is power in the simplicity of
|
rlm@451
|
598 the action predicates. They describe their actions without getting
|
rlm@451
|
599 confused in visual details of the worm. Each one is frame
|
rlm@451
|
600 independent, but more than that, they are each indepent of
|
rlm@449
|
601 irrelevant visual details of the worm and the environment. They
|
rlm@449
|
602 will work regardless of whether the worm is a different color or
|
rlm@451
|
603 hevaily textured, or if the environment has strange lighting.
|
rlm@449
|
604
|
rlm@449
|
605 The trick now is to make the action predicates work even when the
|
rlm@449
|
606 sensory data on which they depend is absent. If I can do that, then
|
rlm@449
|
607 I will have gained much,
|
rlm@435
|
608
|
rlm@436
|
609 ** \Phi-space describes the worm's experiences
|
rlm@449
|
610
|
rlm@449
|
611 As a first step towards building empathy, I need to gather all of
|
rlm@449
|
612 the worm's experiences during free play. I use a simple vector to
|
rlm@449
|
613 store all the experiences.
|
rlm@449
|
614
|
rlm@449
|
615 Each element of the experience vector exists in the vast space of
|
rlm@449
|
616 all possible worm-experiences. Most of this vast space is actually
|
rlm@449
|
617 unreachable due to physical constraints of the worm's body. For
|
rlm@449
|
618 example, the worm's segments are connected by hinge joints that put
|
rlm@451
|
619 a practical limit on the worm's range of motions without limiting
|
rlm@451
|
620 its degrees of freedom. Some groupings of senses are impossible;
|
rlm@451
|
621 the worm can not be bent into a circle so that its ends are
|
rlm@451
|
622 touching and at the same time not also experience the sensation of
|
rlm@451
|
623 touching itself.
|
rlm@449
|
624
|
rlm@451
|
625 As the worm moves around during free play and its experience vector
|
rlm@451
|
626 grows larger, the vector begins to define a subspace which is all
|
rlm@451
|
627 the sensations the worm can practicaly experience during normal
|
rlm@451
|
628 operation. I call this subspace \Phi-space, short for
|
rlm@451
|
629 physical-space. The experience vector defines a path through
|
rlm@451
|
630 \Phi-space. This path has interesting properties that all derive
|
rlm@451
|
631 from physical embodiment. The proprioceptive components are
|
rlm@451
|
632 completely smooth, because in order for the worm to move from one
|
rlm@451
|
633 position to another, it must pass through the intermediate
|
rlm@451
|
634 positions. The path invariably forms loops as actions are repeated.
|
rlm@451
|
635 Finally and most importantly, proprioception actually gives very
|
rlm@451
|
636 strong inference about the other senses. For example, when the worm
|
rlm@451
|
637 is flat, you can infer that it is touching the ground and that its
|
rlm@451
|
638 muscles are not active, because if the muscles were active, the
|
rlm@451
|
639 worm would be moving and would not be perfectly flat. In order to
|
rlm@451
|
640 stay flat, the worm has to be touching the ground, or it would
|
rlm@451
|
641 again be moving out of the flat position due to gravity. If the
|
rlm@451
|
642 worm is positioned in such a way that it interacts with itself,
|
rlm@451
|
643 then it is very likely to be feeling the same tactile feelings as
|
rlm@451
|
644 the last time it was in that position, because it has the same body
|
rlm@451
|
645 as then. If you observe multiple frames of proprioceptive data,
|
rlm@451
|
646 then you can become increasingly confident about the exact
|
rlm@451
|
647 activations of the worm's muscles, because it generally takes a
|
rlm@451
|
648 unique combination of muscle contractions to transform the worm's
|
rlm@451
|
649 body along a specific path through \Phi-space.
|
rlm@449
|
650
|
rlm@449
|
651 There is a simple way of taking \Phi-space and the total ordering
|
rlm@449
|
652 provided by an experience vector and reliably infering the rest of
|
rlm@449
|
653 the senses.
|
rlm@435
|
654
|
rlm@436
|
655 ** Empathy is the process of tracing though \Phi-space
|
rlm@449
|
656
|
rlm@450
|
657 Here is the core of a basic empathy algorithm, starting with an
|
rlm@451
|
658 experience vector:
|
rlm@451
|
659
|
rlm@451
|
660 First, group the experiences into tiered proprioceptive bins. I use
|
rlm@451
|
661 powers of 10 and 3 bins, and the smallest bin has an approximate
|
rlm@451
|
662 size of 0.001 radians in all proprioceptive dimensions.
|
rlm@450
|
663
|
rlm@450
|
664 Then, given a sequence of proprioceptive input, generate a set of
|
rlm@451
|
665 matching experience records for each input, using the tiered
|
rlm@451
|
666 proprioceptive bins.
|
rlm@449
|
667
|
rlm@450
|
668 Finally, to infer sensory data, select the longest consective chain
|
rlm@451
|
669 of experiences. Conecutive experience means that the experiences
|
rlm@451
|
670 appear next to each other in the experience vector.
|
rlm@449
|
671
|
rlm@450
|
672 This algorithm has three advantages:
|
rlm@450
|
673
|
rlm@450
|
674 1. It's simple
|
rlm@450
|
675
|
rlm@451
|
676 3. It's very fast -- retrieving possible interpretations takes
|
rlm@451
|
677 constant time. Tracing through chains of interpretations takes
|
rlm@451
|
678 time proportional to the average number of experiences in a
|
rlm@451
|
679 proprioceptive bin. Redundant experiences in \Phi-space can be
|
rlm@451
|
680 merged to save computation.
|
rlm@450
|
681
|
rlm@450
|
682 2. It protects from wrong interpretations of transient ambiguous
|
rlm@451
|
683 proprioceptive data. For example, if the worm is flat for just
|
rlm@450
|
684 an instant, this flattness will not be interpreted as implying
|
rlm@450
|
685 that the worm has its muscles relaxed, since the flattness is
|
rlm@450
|
686 part of a longer chain which includes a distinct pattern of
|
rlm@451
|
687 muscle activation. Markov chains or other memoryless statistical
|
rlm@451
|
688 models that operate on individual frames may very well make this
|
rlm@451
|
689 mistake.
|
rlm@450
|
690
|
rlm@450
|
691 #+caption: Program to convert an experience vector into a
|
rlm@450
|
692 #+caption: proprioceptively binned lookup function.
|
rlm@450
|
693 #+name: bin
|
rlm@452
|
694 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
695 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@450
|
696 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@449
|
697 (defn bin [digits]
|
rlm@449
|
698 (fn [angles]
|
rlm@449
|
699 (->> angles
|
rlm@449
|
700 (flatten)
|
rlm@449
|
701 (map (juxt #(Math/sin %) #(Math/cos %)))
|
rlm@449
|
702 (flatten)
|
rlm@449
|
703 (mapv #(Math/round (* % (Math/pow 10 (dec digits))))))))
|
rlm@449
|
704
|
rlm@449
|
705 (defn gen-phi-scan
|
rlm@450
|
706 "Nearest-neighbors with binning. Only returns a result if
|
rlm@450
|
707 the propriceptive data is within 10% of a previously recorded
|
rlm@450
|
708 result in all dimensions."
|
rlm@450
|
709 [phi-space]
|
rlm@449
|
710 (let [bin-keys (map bin [3 2 1])
|
rlm@449
|
711 bin-maps
|
rlm@449
|
712 (map (fn [bin-key]
|
rlm@449
|
713 (group-by
|
rlm@449
|
714 (comp bin-key :proprioception phi-space)
|
rlm@449
|
715 (range (count phi-space)))) bin-keys)
|
rlm@449
|
716 lookups (map (fn [bin-key bin-map]
|
rlm@450
|
717 (fn [proprio] (bin-map (bin-key proprio))))
|
rlm@450
|
718 bin-keys bin-maps)]
|
rlm@449
|
719 (fn lookup [proprio-data]
|
rlm@449
|
720 (set (some #(% proprio-data) lookups)))))
|
rlm@450
|
721 #+end_src
|
rlm@450
|
722 #+end_listing
|
rlm@449
|
723
|
rlm@451
|
724 #+caption: =longest-thread= finds the longest path of consecutive
|
rlm@451
|
725 #+caption: experiences to explain proprioceptive worm data.
|
rlm@451
|
726 #+name: phi-space-history-scan
|
rlm@451
|
727 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 10cm
|
rlm@451
|
728 [[./images/aurellem-gray.png]]
|
rlm@451
|
729
|
rlm@451
|
730 =longest-thread= infers sensory data by stitching together pieces
|
rlm@451
|
731 from previous experience. It prefers longer chains of previous
|
rlm@451
|
732 experience to shorter ones. For example, during training the worm
|
rlm@451
|
733 might rest on the ground for one second before it performs its
|
rlm@451
|
734 excercises. If during recognition the worm rests on the ground for
|
rlm@451
|
735 five seconds, =longest-thread= will accomodate this five second
|
rlm@451
|
736 rest period by looping the one second rest chain five times.
|
rlm@451
|
737
|
rlm@451
|
738 =longest-thread= takes time proportinal to the average number of
|
rlm@451
|
739 entries in a proprioceptive bin, because for each element in the
|
rlm@451
|
740 starting bin it performes a series of set lookups in the preceeding
|
rlm@451
|
741 bins. If the total history is limited, then this is only a constant
|
rlm@451
|
742 multiple times the number of entries in the starting bin. This
|
rlm@451
|
743 analysis also applies even if the action requires multiple longest
|
rlm@451
|
744 chains -- it's still the average number of entries in a
|
rlm@451
|
745 proprioceptive bin times the desired chain length. Because
|
rlm@451
|
746 =longest-thread= is so efficient and simple, I can interpret
|
rlm@451
|
747 worm-actions in real time.
|
rlm@449
|
748
|
rlm@450
|
749 #+caption: Program to calculate empathy by tracing though \Phi-space
|
rlm@450
|
750 #+caption: and finding the longest (ie. most coherent) interpretation
|
rlm@450
|
751 #+caption: of the data.
|
rlm@450
|
752 #+name: longest-thread
|
rlm@452
|
753 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
754 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@450
|
755 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@449
|
756 (defn longest-thread
|
rlm@449
|
757 "Find the longest thread from phi-index-sets. The index sets should
|
rlm@449
|
758 be ordered from most recent to least recent."
|
rlm@449
|
759 [phi-index-sets]
|
rlm@449
|
760 (loop [result '()
|
rlm@449
|
761 [thread-bases & remaining :as phi-index-sets] phi-index-sets]
|
rlm@449
|
762 (if (empty? phi-index-sets)
|
rlm@449
|
763 (vec result)
|
rlm@449
|
764 (let [threads
|
rlm@449
|
765 (for [thread-base thread-bases]
|
rlm@449
|
766 (loop [thread (list thread-base)
|
rlm@449
|
767 remaining remaining]
|
rlm@449
|
768 (let [next-index (dec (first thread))]
|
rlm@449
|
769 (cond (empty? remaining) thread
|
rlm@449
|
770 (contains? (first remaining) next-index)
|
rlm@449
|
771 (recur
|
rlm@449
|
772 (cons next-index thread) (rest remaining))
|
rlm@449
|
773 :else thread))))
|
rlm@449
|
774 longest-thread
|
rlm@449
|
775 (reduce (fn [thread-a thread-b]
|
rlm@449
|
776 (if (> (count thread-a) (count thread-b))
|
rlm@449
|
777 thread-a thread-b))
|
rlm@449
|
778 '(nil)
|
rlm@449
|
779 threads)]
|
rlm@449
|
780 (recur (concat longest-thread result)
|
rlm@449
|
781 (drop (count longest-thread) phi-index-sets))))))
|
rlm@450
|
782 #+end_src
|
rlm@450
|
783 #+end_listing
|
rlm@450
|
784
|
rlm@451
|
785 There is one final piece, which is to replace missing sensory data
|
rlm@451
|
786 with a best-guess estimate. While I could fill in missing data by
|
rlm@451
|
787 using a gradient over the closest known sensory data points,
|
rlm@451
|
788 averages can be misleading. It is certainly possible to create an
|
rlm@451
|
789 impossible sensory state by averaging two possible sensory states.
|
rlm@451
|
790 Therefore, I simply replicate the most recent sensory experience to
|
rlm@451
|
791 fill in the gaps.
|
rlm@449
|
792
|
rlm@449
|
793 #+caption: Fill in blanks in sensory experience by replicating the most
|
rlm@449
|
794 #+caption: recent experience.
|
rlm@449
|
795 #+name: infer-nils
|
rlm@452
|
796 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
797 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@449
|
798 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@449
|
799 (defn infer-nils
|
rlm@449
|
800 "Replace nils with the next available non-nil element in the
|
rlm@449
|
801 sequence, or barring that, 0."
|
rlm@449
|
802 [s]
|
rlm@449
|
803 (loop [i (dec (count s))
|
rlm@449
|
804 v (transient s)]
|
rlm@449
|
805 (if (zero? i) (persistent! v)
|
rlm@449
|
806 (if-let [cur (v i)]
|
rlm@449
|
807 (if (get v (dec i) 0)
|
rlm@449
|
808 (recur (dec i) v)
|
rlm@449
|
809 (recur (dec i) (assoc! v (dec i) cur)))
|
rlm@449
|
810 (recur i (assoc! v i 0))))))
|
rlm@449
|
811 #+end_src
|
rlm@449
|
812 #+end_listing
|
rlm@435
|
813
|
rlm@441
|
814 ** Efficient action recognition with =EMPATH=
|
rlm@451
|
815
|
rlm@451
|
816 To use =EMPATH= with the worm, I first need to gather a set of
|
rlm@451
|
817 experiences from the worm that includes the actions I want to
|
rlm@452
|
818 recognize. The =generate-phi-space= program (listing
|
rlm@451
|
819 \ref{generate-phi-space} runs the worm through a series of
|
rlm@451
|
820 exercices and gatheres those experiences into a vector. The
|
rlm@451
|
821 =do-all-the-things= program is a routine expressed in a simple
|
rlm@452
|
822 muscle contraction script language for automated worm control. It
|
rlm@452
|
823 causes the worm to rest, curl, and wiggle over about 700 frames
|
rlm@452
|
824 (approx. 11 seconds).
|
rlm@425
|
825
|
rlm@451
|
826 #+caption: Program to gather the worm's experiences into a vector for
|
rlm@451
|
827 #+caption: further processing. The =motor-control-program= line uses
|
rlm@451
|
828 #+caption: a motor control script that causes the worm to execute a series
|
rlm@451
|
829 #+caption: of ``exercices'' that include all the action predicates.
|
rlm@451
|
830 #+name: generate-phi-space
|
rlm@452
|
831 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
832 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@451
|
833 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@451
|
834 (def do-all-the-things
|
rlm@451
|
835 (concat
|
rlm@451
|
836 curl-script
|
rlm@451
|
837 [[300 :d-ex 40]
|
rlm@451
|
838 [320 :d-ex 0]]
|
rlm@451
|
839 (shift-script 280 (take 16 wiggle-script))))
|
rlm@451
|
840
|
rlm@451
|
841 (defn generate-phi-space []
|
rlm@451
|
842 (let [experiences (atom [])]
|
rlm@451
|
843 (run-world
|
rlm@451
|
844 (apply-map
|
rlm@451
|
845 worm-world
|
rlm@451
|
846 (merge
|
rlm@451
|
847 (worm-world-defaults)
|
rlm@451
|
848 {:end-frame 700
|
rlm@451
|
849 :motor-control
|
rlm@451
|
850 (motor-control-program worm-muscle-labels do-all-the-things)
|
rlm@451
|
851 :experiences experiences})))
|
rlm@451
|
852 @experiences))
|
rlm@451
|
853 #+end_src
|
rlm@451
|
854 #+end_listing
|
rlm@451
|
855
|
rlm@451
|
856 #+caption: Use longest thread and a phi-space generated from a short
|
rlm@451
|
857 #+caption: exercise routine to interpret actions during free play.
|
rlm@451
|
858 #+name: empathy-debug
|
rlm@452
|
859 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
860 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@451
|
861 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@451
|
862 (defn init []
|
rlm@451
|
863 (def phi-space (generate-phi-space))
|
rlm@451
|
864 (def phi-scan (gen-phi-scan phi-space)))
|
rlm@451
|
865
|
rlm@451
|
866 (defn empathy-demonstration []
|
rlm@451
|
867 (let [proprio (atom ())]
|
rlm@451
|
868 (fn
|
rlm@451
|
869 [experiences text]
|
rlm@451
|
870 (let [phi-indices (phi-scan (:proprioception (peek experiences)))]
|
rlm@451
|
871 (swap! proprio (partial cons phi-indices))
|
rlm@451
|
872 (let [exp-thread (longest-thread (take 300 @proprio))
|
rlm@451
|
873 empathy (mapv phi-space (infer-nils exp-thread))]
|
rlm@451
|
874 (println-repl (vector:last-n exp-thread 22))
|
rlm@451
|
875 (cond
|
rlm@451
|
876 (grand-circle? empathy) (.setText text "Grand Circle")
|
rlm@451
|
877 (curled? empathy) (.setText text "Curled")
|
rlm@451
|
878 (wiggling? empathy) (.setText text "Wiggling")
|
rlm@451
|
879 (resting? empathy) (.setText text "Resting")
|
rlm@451
|
880 :else (.setText text "Unknown")))))))
|
rlm@451
|
881
|
rlm@451
|
882 (defn empathy-experiment [record]
|
rlm@451
|
883 (.start (worm-world :experience-watch (debug-experience-phi)
|
rlm@451
|
884 :record record :worm worm*)))
|
rlm@451
|
885 #+end_src
|
rlm@451
|
886 #+end_listing
|
rlm@451
|
887
|
rlm@451
|
888 The result of running =empathy-experiment= is that the system is
|
rlm@451
|
889 generally able to interpret worm actions using the action-predicates
|
rlm@451
|
890 on simulated sensory data just as well as with actual data. Figure
|
rlm@451
|
891 \ref{empathy-debug-image} was generated using =empathy-experiment=:
|
rlm@451
|
892
|
rlm@451
|
893 #+caption: From only proprioceptive data, =EMPATH= was able to infer
|
rlm@451
|
894 #+caption: the complete sensory experience and classify four poses
|
rlm@451
|
895 #+caption: (The last panel shows a composite image of \emph{wriggling},
|
rlm@451
|
896 #+caption: a dynamic pose.)
|
rlm@451
|
897 #+name: empathy-debug-image
|
rlm@451
|
898 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 10cm :placement [H]
|
rlm@451
|
899 [[./images/empathy-1.png]]
|
rlm@451
|
900
|
rlm@451
|
901 One way to measure the performance of =EMPATH= is to compare the
|
rlm@451
|
902 sutiability of the imagined sense experience to trigger the same
|
rlm@451
|
903 action predicates as the real sensory experience.
|
rlm@451
|
904
|
rlm@451
|
905 #+caption: Determine how closely empathy approximates actual
|
rlm@451
|
906 #+caption: sensory data.
|
rlm@451
|
907 #+name: test-empathy-accuracy
|
rlm@452
|
908 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@452
|
909 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@451
|
910 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@451
|
911 (def worm-action-label
|
rlm@451
|
912 (juxt grand-circle? curled? wiggling?))
|
rlm@451
|
913
|
rlm@451
|
914 (defn compare-empathy-with-baseline [matches]
|
rlm@451
|
915 (let [proprio (atom ())]
|
rlm@451
|
916 (fn
|
rlm@451
|
917 [experiences text]
|
rlm@451
|
918 (let [phi-indices (phi-scan (:proprioception (peek experiences)))]
|
rlm@451
|
919 (swap! proprio (partial cons phi-indices))
|
rlm@451
|
920 (let [exp-thread (longest-thread (take 300 @proprio))
|
rlm@451
|
921 empathy (mapv phi-space (infer-nils exp-thread))
|
rlm@451
|
922 experience-matches-empathy
|
rlm@451
|
923 (= (worm-action-label experiences)
|
rlm@451
|
924 (worm-action-label empathy))]
|
rlm@451
|
925 (println-repl experience-matches-empathy)
|
rlm@451
|
926 (swap! matches #(conj % experience-matches-empathy)))))))
|
rlm@451
|
927
|
rlm@451
|
928 (defn accuracy [v]
|
rlm@451
|
929 (float (/ (count (filter true? v)) (count v))))
|
rlm@451
|
930
|
rlm@451
|
931 (defn test-empathy-accuracy []
|
rlm@451
|
932 (let [res (atom [])]
|
rlm@451
|
933 (run-world
|
rlm@451
|
934 (worm-world :experience-watch
|
rlm@451
|
935 (compare-empathy-with-baseline res)
|
rlm@451
|
936 :worm worm*))
|
rlm@451
|
937 (accuracy @res)))
|
rlm@451
|
938 #+end_src
|
rlm@451
|
939 #+end_listing
|
rlm@451
|
940
|
rlm@451
|
941 Running =test-empathy-accuracy= using the very short exercise
|
rlm@451
|
942 program defined in listing \ref{generate-phi-space}, and then doing
|
rlm@451
|
943 a similar pattern of activity manually yeilds an accuracy of around
|
rlm@451
|
944 73%. This is based on very limited worm experience. By training the
|
rlm@451
|
945 worm for longer, the accuracy dramatically improves.
|
rlm@451
|
946
|
rlm@451
|
947 #+caption: Program to generate \Phi-space using manual training.
|
rlm@451
|
948 #+name: manual-phi-space
|
rlm@452
|
949 #+attr_latex: [htpb]
|
rlm@451
|
950 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@451
|
951 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@451
|
952 (defn init-interactive []
|
rlm@451
|
953 (def phi-space
|
rlm@451
|
954 (let [experiences (atom [])]
|
rlm@451
|
955 (run-world
|
rlm@451
|
956 (apply-map
|
rlm@451
|
957 worm-world
|
rlm@451
|
958 (merge
|
rlm@451
|
959 (worm-world-defaults)
|
rlm@451
|
960 {:experiences experiences})))
|
rlm@451
|
961 @experiences))
|
rlm@451
|
962 (def phi-scan (gen-phi-scan phi-space)))
|
rlm@451
|
963 #+end_src
|
rlm@451
|
964 #+end_listing
|
rlm@451
|
965
|
rlm@451
|
966 After about 1 minute of manual training, I was able to achieve 95%
|
rlm@451
|
967 accuracy on manual testing of the worm using =init-interactive= and
|
rlm@452
|
968 =test-empathy-accuracy=. The majority of errors are near the
|
rlm@452
|
969 boundaries of transitioning from one type of action to another.
|
rlm@452
|
970 During these transitions the exact label for the action is more open
|
rlm@452
|
971 to interpretation, and dissaggrement between empathy and experience
|
rlm@452
|
972 is more excusable.
|
rlm@450
|
973
|
rlm@449
|
974 ** Digression: bootstrapping touch using free exploration
|
rlm@449
|
975
|
rlm@452
|
976 In the previous section I showed how to compute actions in terms of
|
rlm@452
|
977 body-centered predicates which relied averate touch activation of
|
rlm@452
|
978 pre-defined regions of the worm's skin. What if, instead of recieving
|
rlm@452
|
979 touch pre-grouped into the six faces of each worm segment, the true
|
rlm@452
|
980 topology of the worm's skin was unknown? This is more similiar to how
|
rlm@452
|
981 a nerve fiber bundle might be arranged. While two fibers that are
|
rlm@452
|
982 close in a nerve bundle /might/ correspond to two touch sensors that
|
rlm@452
|
983 are close together on the skin, the process of taking a complicated
|
rlm@452
|
984 surface and forcing it into essentially a circle requires some cuts
|
rlm@452
|
985 and rerragenments.
|
rlm@452
|
986
|
rlm@452
|
987 In this section I show how to automatically learn the skin-topology of
|
rlm@452
|
988 a worm segment by free exploration. As the worm rolls around on the
|
rlm@452
|
989 floor, large sections of its surface get activated. If the worm has
|
rlm@452
|
990 stopped moving, then whatever region of skin that is touching the
|
rlm@452
|
991 floor is probably an important region, and should be recorded.
|
rlm@452
|
992
|
rlm@452
|
993 #+caption: Program to detect whether the worm is in a resting state
|
rlm@452
|
994 #+caption: with one face touching the floor.
|
rlm@452
|
995 #+name: pure-touch
|
rlm@452
|
996 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@452
|
997 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@452
|
998 (def full-contact [(float 0.0) (float 0.1)])
|
rlm@452
|
999
|
rlm@452
|
1000 (defn pure-touch?
|
rlm@452
|
1001 "This is worm specific code to determine if a large region of touch
|
rlm@452
|
1002 sensors is either all on or all off."
|
rlm@452
|
1003 [[coords touch :as touch-data]]
|
rlm@452
|
1004 (= (set (map first touch)) (set full-contact)))
|
rlm@452
|
1005 #+end_src
|
rlm@452
|
1006 #+end_listing
|
rlm@452
|
1007
|
rlm@452
|
1008 After collecting these important regions, there will many nearly
|
rlm@452
|
1009 similiar touch regions. While for some purposes the subtle
|
rlm@452
|
1010 differences between these regions will be important, for my
|
rlm@452
|
1011 purposes I colapse them into mostly non-overlapping sets using
|
rlm@452
|
1012 =remove-similiar= in listing \ref{remove-similiar}
|
rlm@452
|
1013
|
rlm@452
|
1014 #+caption: Program to take a lits of set of points and ``collapse them''
|
rlm@452
|
1015 #+caption: so that the remaining sets in the list are siginificantly
|
rlm@452
|
1016 #+caption: different from each other. Prefer smaller sets to larger ones.
|
rlm@452
|
1017 #+name: remove-similiar
|
rlm@452
|
1018 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@452
|
1019 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@452
|
1020 (defn remove-similar
|
rlm@452
|
1021 [coll]
|
rlm@452
|
1022 (loop [result () coll (sort-by (comp - count) coll)]
|
rlm@452
|
1023 (if (empty? coll) result
|
rlm@452
|
1024 (let [[x & xs] coll
|
rlm@452
|
1025 c (count x)]
|
rlm@452
|
1026 (if (some
|
rlm@452
|
1027 (fn [other-set]
|
rlm@452
|
1028 (let [oc (count other-set)]
|
rlm@452
|
1029 (< (- (count (union other-set x)) c) (* oc 0.1))))
|
rlm@452
|
1030 xs)
|
rlm@452
|
1031 (recur result xs)
|
rlm@452
|
1032 (recur (cons x result) xs))))))
|
rlm@452
|
1033 #+end_src
|
rlm@452
|
1034 #+end_listing
|
rlm@452
|
1035
|
rlm@452
|
1036 Actually running this simulation is easy given =CORTEX='s facilities.
|
rlm@452
|
1037
|
rlm@452
|
1038 #+caption: Collect experiences while the worm moves around. Filter the touch
|
rlm@452
|
1039 #+caption: sensations by stable ones, collapse similiar ones together,
|
rlm@452
|
1040 #+caption: and report the regions learned.
|
rlm@452
|
1041 #+name: learn-touch
|
rlm@452
|
1042 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@452
|
1043 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@452
|
1044 (defn learn-touch-regions []
|
rlm@452
|
1045 (let [experiences (atom [])
|
rlm@452
|
1046 world (apply-map
|
rlm@452
|
1047 worm-world
|
rlm@452
|
1048 (assoc (worm-segment-defaults)
|
rlm@452
|
1049 :experiences experiences))]
|
rlm@452
|
1050 (run-world world)
|
rlm@452
|
1051 (->>
|
rlm@452
|
1052 @experiences
|
rlm@452
|
1053 (drop 175)
|
rlm@452
|
1054 ;; access the single segment's touch data
|
rlm@452
|
1055 (map (comp first :touch))
|
rlm@452
|
1056 ;; only deal with "pure" touch data to determine surfaces
|
rlm@452
|
1057 (filter pure-touch?)
|
rlm@452
|
1058 ;; associate coordinates with touch values
|
rlm@452
|
1059 (map (partial apply zipmap))
|
rlm@452
|
1060 ;; select those regions where contact is being made
|
rlm@452
|
1061 (map (partial group-by second))
|
rlm@452
|
1062 (map #(get % full-contact))
|
rlm@452
|
1063 (map (partial map first))
|
rlm@452
|
1064 ;; remove redundant/subset regions
|
rlm@452
|
1065 (map set)
|
rlm@452
|
1066 remove-similar)))
|
rlm@452
|
1067
|
rlm@452
|
1068 (defn learn-and-view-touch-regions []
|
rlm@452
|
1069 (map view-touch-region
|
rlm@452
|
1070 (learn-touch-regions)))
|
rlm@452
|
1071 #+end_src
|
rlm@452
|
1072 #+end_listing
|
rlm@452
|
1073
|
rlm@452
|
1074 The only thing remining to define is the particular motion the worm
|
rlm@452
|
1075 must take. I accomplish this with a simple motor control program.
|
rlm@452
|
1076
|
rlm@452
|
1077 #+caption: Motor control program for making the worm roll on the ground.
|
rlm@452
|
1078 #+caption: This could also be replaced with random motion.
|
rlm@452
|
1079 #+name: worm-roll
|
rlm@452
|
1080 #+begin_listing clojure
|
rlm@452
|
1081 #+begin_src clojure
|
rlm@452
|
1082 (defn touch-kinesthetics []
|
rlm@452
|
1083 [[170 :lift-1 40]
|
rlm@452
|
1084 [190 :lift-1 19]
|
rlm@452
|
1085 [206 :lift-1 0]
|
rlm@452
|
1086
|
rlm@452
|
1087 [400 :lift-2 40]
|
rlm@452
|
1088 [410 :lift-2 0]
|
rlm@452
|
1089
|
rlm@452
|
1090 [570 :lift-2 40]
|
rlm@452
|
1091 [590 :lift-2 21]
|
rlm@452
|
1092 [606 :lift-2 0]
|
rlm@452
|
1093
|
rlm@452
|
1094 [800 :lift-1 30]
|
rlm@452
|
1095 [809 :lift-1 0]
|
rlm@452
|
1096
|
rlm@452
|
1097 [900 :roll-2 40]
|
rlm@452
|
1098 [905 :roll-2 20]
|
rlm@452
|
1099 [910 :roll-2 0]
|
rlm@452
|
1100
|
rlm@452
|
1101 [1000 :roll-2 40]
|
rlm@452
|
1102 [1005 :roll-2 20]
|
rlm@452
|
1103 [1010 :roll-2 0]
|
rlm@452
|
1104
|
rlm@452
|
1105 [1100 :roll-2 40]
|
rlm@452
|
1106 [1105 :roll-2 20]
|
rlm@452
|
1107 [1110 :roll-2 0]
|
rlm@452
|
1108 ])
|
rlm@452
|
1109 #+end_src
|
rlm@452
|
1110 #+end_listing
|
rlm@452
|
1111
|
rlm@452
|
1112
|
rlm@452
|
1113 #+caption: The small worm rolls around on the floor, driven
|
rlm@452
|
1114 #+caption: by the motor control program in listing \ref{worm-roll}.
|
rlm@452
|
1115 #+name: worm-roll
|
rlm@452
|
1116 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 12cm
|
rlm@452
|
1117 [[./images/worm-roll.png]]
|
rlm@452
|
1118
|
rlm@452
|
1119
|
rlm@452
|
1120 #+caption: After completing its adventures, the worm now knows
|
rlm@452
|
1121 #+caption: how its touch sensors are arranged along its skin. These
|
rlm@452
|
1122 #+caption: are the regions that were deemed important by
|
rlm@452
|
1123 #+caption: =learn-touch-regions=. Note that the worm has discovered
|
rlm@452
|
1124 #+caption: that it has six sides.
|
rlm@452
|
1125 #+name: worm-touch-map
|
rlm@452
|
1126 #+ATTR_LaTeX: :width 12cm
|
rlm@452
|
1127 [[./images/touch-learn.png]]
|
rlm@452
|
1128
|
rlm@452
|
1129 While simple, =learn-touch-regions= exploits regularities in both
|
rlm@452
|
1130 the worm's physiology and the worm's environment to correctly
|
rlm@452
|
1131 deduce that the worm has six sides. Note that =learn-touch-regions=
|
rlm@452
|
1132 would work just as well even if the worm's touch sense data were
|
rlm@452
|
1133 completely scrambled. The cross shape is just for convienence. This
|
rlm@452
|
1134 example justifies the use of pre-defined touch regions in =EMPATH=.
|
rlm@452
|
1135
|
rlm@432
|
1136 * Contributions
|
rlm@447
|
1137
|
rlm@447
|
1138
|
rlm@447
|
1139
|
rlm@447
|
1140
|
rlm@447
|
1141 # An anatomical joke:
|
rlm@447
|
1142 # - Training
|
rlm@447
|
1143 # - Skeletal imitation
|
rlm@447
|
1144 # - Sensory fleshing-out
|
rlm@447
|
1145 # - Classification
|