Is there any real advantage to Humaniod Robots?

[Calzaer]

It seems to me that, when we can design robots to use any form of locomotion and/or object manipulation appendages we want them to have, there are many better forms to fill those functions than arms and legs. It seems like two legs is unstable enough for HUMANS. What advantages do a pair of legs (for example) have over the myriad of other possible options? Treads, Tires set up in a rotating triangle pattern (three to a side, so that it can go up stairs and navigate rough terrain), or even fantastic animal-like things (four legs, spider legs, kangaroo legs, etc).?

The same goes for arms, I suppose, but, being so human-centric I can't think of an example of a potentially better grasping/manipulation apparatus.

Edit: Oh, and why a distinct head? That seems to bring several disadvantages along with it, especially if that's where the CPU clusters are grouped (just because, well, that's where the brain goes! In the head!). Wouldn't "eyestalks" be a less vulnerable and more versitile sensor-mounting idea?

[anthrosciguy]

I think here the advantages and disadvantages are one and the same -- it's because they look like us. That's why we like them, up to a point. But then, at some point, we get uncomfortable with them looking a little too much like us. There's a term for this, which I read about when Roger Ebert referenced it on his movie review site (regarding, in that case, the role of Gollum and the actor who played him in LOTR). Here's what he said there:

But animation and robot theorists talk about a strange phenomenon that happens when artificial characters begin to seem "too real." This is the Uncanny Valley Effect, named in 1978 by the Japanese robot scientist Masahiro Mori.

According to a New Yorker article by John Seabrook, "Mori tested people's emotional responses to a wide variety of robots, from non-humanoid to completely humanoid. He found that the human tendency to empathize with machines increases as the robot becomes more human. But at a certain point, when the robot becomes too human, the emotional sympathy abruptly ceases, and revulsion takes its place. People began to notice not the charmingly human characteristics of the robot but the creepy zombielike differences."

[Marduk]

Legs may be awkward but they can navigate a wider range of terrain’s, steps, water, rocks & mountains etc. Same for hands, the reason humans can do all they do is because they have free hands.

[Asha'man]

Well, one obvious advantage: they can use tools and devices that were designed to be used by humans.

[Calzaer]

Legs may be awkward but they can navigate a wider range of terrain’s, steps, water, rocks & mountains etc. Same for hands, the reason humans can do all they do is because they have free hands.

So you're saying that arms/legs are the BEST POSSIBLE structures for manipulation/locomotion?

[Godless Wonder]

Humanoid robots are sexier. :D

I remember reading a quote by someone famous (somebody like Steve Jobs, but not him.) that was along the lines of "all technological progress is driven by pornography."

[Hyndis]

Humanoid robots are sexier. :D

I remember reading a quote by someone famous (somebody like Steve Jobs, but not him.) that was along the lines of "all technological progress is driven by pornography."

And if holodecks were invented, and everyone could get their own personal holodeck, would technology cease to advance? :D

[Invader Zim]

I think the best design for a robot is based on what its job is and while a humanoid based design isn't a bad tradeoff for some things, it does have its flaws.

In my opinion, the Larry Niven's Puppeteers design would be an excellent choice for a general purpose droid. Its brain case is under a hump in the front of the torso. It has three legs and two "arms" with a mouth and eye on each head. The lips on the mouth do double duty as fingers.

I'd consider four legs as I'm not so sure that three legs is an improvement over our two. I'd also create a droid with better "arms" and "hands" than the Puppeteer. But the Puppeteer would be the general archetype.

Puppeteer (http://www.physics.hku.hk/~tboyce/sf/creatures/puppeteer.html)

[American Humanist]

While we will be able to make robots of all different forms an fundtion, the ones with which humans will frequently interact with will likely have a humanoid appearance solely to make such interactions more natural. A box on wheele/treads/etc. is fine for telepresence and other more impersonal functions but human beings will feel more comfortible with a familiar look.

[Norseman]

Actually, two legs is really really really hard to make. All the accelerometers, the joints, the counterbalances; it's just insane trying to make one. Honestly, just try to stand still. Feel your feet twitching to keep you balanced? Well, it's almost impossible to stick those muscles in the feet of a robot, so it all has to be done with counterbalances, and gyroscopes. And, the sensors involved (accelerometers usually include balancing hardware) can't measure as accurately or as often as humans, so the robot usually ends up tilting left and right all the time (and with a tiny little push they overbalance and in the case my two wheel robot experiment went halfway through the wall before being too damaged to keep pushing). Now, that's just getting it to stand, getting it to walk would involve keeping track of balance, acceleration, and velocity, whilst maintaining an upright stance, and moving in a controlled manner such that you can slow down and change direction as needed. And all this just for two legs...

A tripod is the simple solution, a quadrapod just keeps things symetric which makes drafting the schematics easier.

As for arms, human arms are ok, but fingers are insane to build. The level of complexity in making something so dexterous, sensitive, and strong, makes it almost impossible to do. The simple solution would be to provide a special attachment to the arm which would lock into any tools designed for the machine.

As for a head... You don't need one. Most of the logic circuits can be stuck on the thing's back, unless you're talking about an A.I. but in that case all the more important to keep the computer somewhere stable.

And for sensory gathering, you'd only need a camera, an echolocator would be nice, and GPS would be golden.

So think of a four legged machine, with a PC on its back, a camera on the front, a little satelite transceiver on the top, and two arms projecting forward with little rods that could stick into something and then expand the ends thus locking them into some tool or perhaps enabling it to open a door. That would be the most practical, most effective design you could make (and if you cared you could even add solar panels to make the thing able to wander the Mohave desert or some such thing, going wherever it needs to go).

[Tuvar Ane Ingolenen]

Well, one obvious advantage: they can use tools and devices that were designed to be used by humans.
Isn't this the explantion that Asimov himself used?

[The Other Michael]

I recall reading many years ago an SF short story in which all the robots were of a generalist/humanoid style, and they were starting to exhibit nueroses because of all the unused abilities. An example was a bartender robot - he didn't need legs to mix drinks, but the extra abilities (obviously there was some level of cognition in the bots) were a sufficient distraction that it interfered with correctly making drinks. The protagonists started modifying the robots to eliminate unused functions, and everything got back on an even keel.

Do you need a "handyman" robot that can do a lot of things moderately well? If so, then a humanoid bot might make some sense. If you need a more focused critter than eliminating a bunch of unused features makes sense.

cheers,
Michael

[butswana]

Which one would you rather fuck?
Priss or R2-D2?

[Herman Hedning]

Of course the main use of humanoid robots would be to make hot chicks like in Chobits (http://www.animechobits.com) for instance.

Those are network cables by the way.

http://www.animechains.com/chobits/frames/22/4.jpg

[JB01]

The same goes for arms, I suppose, but, being so human-centric I can't think of an example of a potentially better grasping/manipulation apparatus.

Maybe not, but there could certainly be situations in which there would be an advantage in having more than two of them.