Phil 3.16.18

7:00 – 4:00 ASRC MKT

    • Umwelt
      • In the semiotic theories of Jakob von Uexküll and Thomas A. Sebeokumwelt (plural: umwelten; from the German Umwelt meaning “environment” or “surroundings”) is the “biological foundations that lie at the very epicenter of the study of both communication and signification in the human [and non-human] animal”.[1] The term is usually translated as “self-centered world”.[2] Uexküll theorised that organisms can have different umwelten, even though they share the same environment. The subject of umwelt and Uexküll’s work is described by Dorion Sagan in an introduction to a collection of translations.[3] The term umwelt, together with companion terms umgebungand innenwelt, have special relevance for cognitive philosophers, roboticists and cyberneticians, since they offer a solution to the conundrum of the infinite regress of the Cartesian Theater.
    • Benjamin Kuipers
      • How Can We Trust a Robot? (video)
        • Advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and robotics have raised concerns about the impact on our society of intelligent robots, unconstrained by morality or ethics
      • Socially-Aware Navigation Using Topological Maps and Social Norm Learning
        • We present socially-aware navigation for an intelligent robot wheelchair in an environment with many pedestrians. The robot learns social norms by observing the behaviors of human pedestrians, interpreting detected biases as social norms, and incorporating those norms into its motion planning. We compare our socially-aware motion planner with a baseline motion planner that produces safe, collision-free motion. The ability of our robot to learn generalizable social norms depends on our use of a topological map abstraction, so that a practical number of observations can allow learning of a social norm applicable in a wide variety of circumstances. We show that the robot can detect biases in observed human behavior that support learning the social norm of driving on the right. Furthermore, we show that when the robot follows these social norms, its behavior influences the behavior of pedestrians around it, increasing their adherence to the same norms. We conjecture that the legibility of the robot’s normative behavior improves human pedestrians’ ability to predict the robot’s future behavior, making them more likely to follow the same norm.
    • Erin’s defense
      • Nice slides!
      • Slide 4 – narrowing from big question to dissertation topic. Nice way to set up framing
      • Intellectual function vs. adaptive behavior
      • Loss of self-determination
      • Maker culture as a way of having your own high-dimensional vector? Does this mean that the maker culture is inherently more exploratory when compared to …?
      • “Frustration is an easy way to end up in off-task behavior”
      • Peer learning as gradient descent?
      • Emic ethnography
      • Pervasive technology in education
      • Turn-taking
      • Antecedent behavior consequence theory
      • Reducing the burden on the educators. Low-level detection and to draw attention to the educator and annotate. Capturing and labeling
      • Helina – bring the conclusions back to the core questions
      • Diversity injection works! Mainstream students gained broader appreciation of students with disability
      • Q: Does it make more sense to focus on potentially charismatic technologies that will include the more difficult outliers even if it requires a breakthrough? Or to make incremental improvements that can improve accessibility to some people with disabilities faster?
      • Boris analytic software

 

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s