Today we are looking at how to program your NAO Robot for Human Interaction. Watch the video and follow the steps below to get interactive with your robot pal!

1.  Create an animation of movements
   • Right click, select “Create a new box”
   • Select “Timeline”

We want the robot to do 3 things, a five high, a hello, and a goodbye move:

• On the Timeline Edit Box
  • Name: High Five
  • Image: Click “Edit”
    • On the Edit box image
    • Click “Browse” and select a file
  • Click “OK”

Now, as you can remember, if we take it to the box, we can get access to the NAO’s Timeline. Mine now is connected to the PC. So what I’m going to do is I’m going to set some points of the NAO to do some movements. As I have said before on one of my tutorial I’m going to make it set all the joints to the whole body.

We want to make him look like he is doing a high five:

• Right click the arm
  • Click “Stiffen chain on/off”
  • Raise his arm up
• Set joints and keyframe
  • Select “Arms”
• Click “Play” on the Motion Controller

That’s a quite quick high five actually. What we want to do is to actually give him a pause when he got his arm in the air. So, the way we do that is to copy and paste the keyframe.

Grab a few already built in animation, just to show you how much it works:

• Go to Motions>Animations
  • Drag a “Hello” box to the workspace
  • Drag a “Wipe Forehead” box for a goodbye move to the workspace

We want to hear him speak, so:

• Go to Voice
  • Drag a “Speech Recognition” box to the workspace
• Drag a “Switch Case”
  • Connect the “Speech Recognition” box to the “Switch Case” box
  • On the first case, write “Hello” and connect to the “Hello” box
  • On the second case, write “High Five” and connect it to the “High Five” box
  • On the third case, write “Goodbye” and connect it to the “Wipe Forehand” box
• Set parameters of Speech Recognition
  • Word list: Hi; High Five; Goodbye;
  • Play with the threshold to see what works better
  • Click “OK”

So there we have a speech recognition, he will listen to what I am saying and then we will act a motion. Now, what we need to do is to make sure that the robot doesn’t repeat it, so you know, it doesn’t loop back. Before we do that, we are going to:

• Drag 3 “Say” box to the workspace so he can  speak back to us
  • On the “Switch case”, connect the “Hello” case on the “Say” box
    • Localized Text
      • Change the language to English(United States)
      • Write “Hi” on the textbox
  • Connect the “High Five” case on the “Say (1)” box
    • Localized Text
      • Change the language to English(United States)
      • Write “High Five” on the textbox
  • Connect the “Goodbye” case on the “Say(2)” box
    • Localized Text
      • Change the language to English(United States)
      • Write “Goodbye” on the textbox

So, here’s what we are saying, he recognizes it, says a word and does an animation, now what we want to do is we don’t want him to loop, as in he keeps hearing the same sound and maybe he starts to hear himself and repeat himself, so to stop that we need to connect the end of the motion boxes back to the “Speech Recognition” box. A simple output to the input speech.

I am going to make a little change actually, instead of “Hello”, we should put “Hi” here and I’m going to put “Hi” in there which is already done because they have to match otherwise if it doesn’t match he won’t recognize it. So if he hit “Load”

Philip: High Five!

Nao: High Five!

Philip: Goodbye!

Nao: Goodbye!

Philip: Hi!

Nao: Hello!

Brilliant! So that looks likes he’s working very well, so again if we says “Hi”, “High Five” or “Good bye” then he will greet you. If you walk in to room and you say “Hi” to a robot, obviously, he will do his animation and say a speech. Here you can use your imagination and try different things, different animations.

If you liked this article, you may also enjoy these from Robo-Phil:

• Python programming your NAO robot
• Hard at work: A review of the Laevo Exoskeleton

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Tutorial 1: Speech

Helpful hints:

Follow these steps to create a box that we could put our python code into, and have our robot speak: “Hello”. “Hello I am a robot”.

1. Right click the main section box and go to “add new box”
2. Create a name for the box
3. Input main image
4. Select the type of box

Now we’re having a look at the script. Go into the scripts and click ok. And there we have our NAO little box. If we click into it, we have the python code. What we are going to do is change some of the codes to get our robot to speak.

1. Double click the box
2. Select the piece of code you need to alter to get our robot to speak(“def onInput_onStart(self)”)
3. Take out the pass section
4. Type in “ttsproxy = ALProxy(“ALTextToSpeech”)”. (Make sure you get the comment in there).
5. Underneath that, we are going to put “ttsproxy.say” and add the comment “Hello, I am a robot”.

The first line could create an object that gives us access to the robot’s text to speech capabilities. This object is assigned to the variable ttsProxy. We can access the object later through the name ttsProxy. I am going to mount the top line, and the alspeech is there. The second line calls a different function site. This function takes an argument “Hello, I am a robot” and then he uses a string or sequence of characters between two double quoted marks. The robot will speak the string that will pass to the say message aloud.  There are your simple first steps into python and choreograph.

You can now, hopefully, get your NAO robot to talk by using your python programming skills. Now have a play with it’s behavior to see if you can get your NAO to say a longer sentence, or maybe even sing a song. Have a play, and use your imagination!

Tutorial 2: Walking

Helpful hints:

No we’re going get your robot to walk using Python. The NAO can be program to walk to any point using the in-build Python Programming Language instead of using the drag and drop boxes in the choregraphe. Python is more expressive and allows you to do things like computing trigonometric calculations on the robot.

1. Right click the main section box and go to “add new box”
2. Create a name for the box
3. Input main image
4. Select the type of box

First, we want our robot to stand up. Drag a stand up icon into the box. I am actually using the NAO key so the 3D robot in the robot view, and this because we need to put the robot on connecting so we can see what’s going on quite clearly. Oversee when you are using this on the real robot and never forget to trigger on the motors and connect everything up properly.

Open the Code Box

1. Go to “def onInput_onStart(self):”
2. Write “motionProxy = ALProxy(“ALMotion”)”
3. On the next line write “walkTo(0.2,0.0,0.0)”
4. End it with “self.onStopped()”

The first line is a proxy called ALmotion, which what is we created here, which allows us to call the motion functions up. The second line is the walkTo, which moves the robot to a specific distance. Now, look on the decimal places: see that .2 is X and Y and the radius, so he’s going to move .2 forward. Then if I start playing with the other numbers here, he’ll move to the Y radius and then to the other turning point as well. The final bit is the self.on. To stop this, we will call and tell the choregraphe to stop the procedure when it is at the end and just simple loop and loop and loop.

If we are good, we should see this now on the 3D NAO. So if I hit play, we can see it walking along. Well done guys, you can now get your NAO Robot to walk by using
your Python programming skills. Tread carefully!

If you liked this article, you may also enjoy these:

• Robotics, maths, python: A fledgling computer scientist’s guide to inverse kinematics
• Sticky business: Five adhesives tested for 3D printing
• Meet RoboGabby: She’s on a mission to teach more girls about robotics
• Adjust how you learn and quickly pick up robotics programming
• 3-D printing hydraulically-powered robots, no assembly required

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

Robothespian. Source: National Geographic

Narrator ‘RoboThespian’ (borrowing the voice of Simon Pegg), takes us on a whistle-stop tour of what’s going on in robotics labs around the world, where researchers are putting robots through their paces. We’re party to the successes as well as the failures of a menagerie of humanoids including CHIMP, ATLAS, PR2, Herb the Butler, iCub, and others.

Introducing them one by one, the film highlights how the vast majority of robots featured must focus on achieving just a single, specific task. This is intercut with footage showing just how nimble, adaptable and all-round amazing the human body is, and how robotics struggles to emulate this. Take Herb, for instance; the robot butler’s current level of success in clearing a table is remarkable only for its comedy value. Rollin’ Justin, developed by the Institute of Robotics and Mechatronics in Germany, fares somewhat better with its 90 per cent success rate in catching balls. It’s notable that it has taken Honda more than 15 years of development to get ASIMO, dubbed “the world’s most advanced humanoid robot,” to the stage where it can perform multiple actions such as running, jumping and recognising voices.

Directed by Mike Slee and produced by Jini Dürr (both National Geographic documentary veterans) and enhanced with a dramatic soundtrack, Robots 3D provides a rare glimpse behind the scenes. What comes across with searing honesty is just how hard it is to recreate the most basic human actions such as walking, catching a ball and clearing up after dinner. So, while the movie tells us how we as a society might benefit from robots, we also see them failing the most simple of tasks.

Robonaut. Image: National Geographic

They’re impressive nonetheless and the film brings out some strangely likeable personalities. There were also a few robots I’d not yet encountered, including the highly dexterous Robonaut, used to help astronauts on board the International Space Station. It can handle the same tools as humans and perform tasks such as changing an air filter. And COMAN, a headless wonder with flexible joints that refuses to be knocked down.

We saw Robots 3D at London’s Science Museum, where it’s showing at the IMAX cinema. The kids in our party pronounced it “mind blowing” and “dead interesting” – surely the highest accolades for a movie that is just as much about how far the science of robotics still has to go as its recent progress.

NAO and iCub both scored highly in the cuteness stakes, but it was ASIMO that emerged as the kids’ overall favourite in the show.

The children also declared themselves impressed by HRP-2 (a bipedal bot that can crawl, as well as walk), Rollin’ Justin (of ball-catching fame), and CHIMP (for its ability to scan its local area using laser light and sending out pulses that bounce back). They were intrigued that some of the robots could upload information to the cloud for others to share.

The ATLAS rescue robot, designed by the US Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) for use in emergency situations, is also featured in the movie, as was footage of the DARPA Robotics Challenge (DRC) trials. But, somewhat tellingly, despite DARPA’s efforts to stress their humanitarian applications, the kids wanted to see “a bit more of the military robots.” Perhaps ATLAS needs to take on some of iCub’s cuteness to dispel these kinds of conceptions.

In fact, the kids wanted to see more generally and weren’t satisfied by the 40 odd minute length of the film. They also wanted the robots to do more dancing and climbing.

However, as a vehicle for changing public perception towards robotics, Robots 3D is without doubt a great success. It’s a way for people to learn about humanoid robots from the scientists who make them, rather than from movies like iRobot and Terminator, where they’re portrayed as violent and terrifying.

At Robohub, we’re also proud of our own small contribution to the Robots 3D project, in providing some of the educational material to supplement the documentary.

Robots 3D is a refreshingly realistic take on the current state of humanoid robotics, without minimizing the great strides that have been made to date. But although the movie introduces viewers to some of the most incredible humanoid robots out there today, like any snapshot of a fast developing technology, this portrait won’t be state-of-the-art forever. So go out and see it while it’s fresh!

Yesterday I looked through the eyes of a robot.

It was a NAO robot fitted with a 3D printed set of goggles, so that the robot has two real cameras on its head (the eyes of the NAO robot are not in fact cameras). I was in another room wearing an Oculus Rift headset. The Oculus was hooked up to the NAO’s goggle cameras, so that I could see through those cameras – in stereo vision.

But it was even better than that. The head positioning system of the Oculus headset was also hooked up to the robot, so I could turn my head and – in sync – the robot’s head moved. And I was standing in front of a Microsoft Kinect that was tracking my arm movements. Those movements were being sent to the NAO, so by moving my arms I was also moving the robot’s arms.

All together this made for a pretty compelling immersive experience. I was able look down while moving my (robot) arms and see them pretty much where you would expect to see your own arms. The illusion was further strengthened when Peter placed a mirror in front of the NAO robot, so I could see my (robot) self moving in the mirror. Then it got weird. Peter asked me to open my hand and placed a paper cup into it. I instinctively looked down and was momentarily shocked not to see the cup in my hand. That made me realise how quickly – within a couple of minutes of donning the headset – I was adjusting to the new robot me.

This setup, developed here in the BRL by my colleagues Paul Bremner and Pete Gibbons, is part of a large EPSRC project called Being There. Paul and Peter are investigating the very interesting question of how humans interact with and via teleoperated robots, in shared social spaces. I think teleoperated robot avatars will be hugely important in the near future – more so than fully autonomous robots. But our robot surrogates will not look like a younger buffer Bruce Willis. They will look like robots. How will we interact with these surrogate robots – robots with human intelligences, human personalities – seemingly with human souls? Will they be treated with the same level of respect that would be accorded their humans if they were actually there, in the flesh? Or be despised as voyeuristic; an uninvited webcam on wheels?

Here is a YouTube video of an earlier version of this setup, without the goggles or Kinect:

I didn’t get the feeling of what it is like to be a robot, but it’s a step in that direction.

Using computer graphics and motion simulations, on-screen robots can be quite convincing and similar to the real thing, and researchers sometimes use these to conduct studies about how people interact with these robots. Clearly, simulations have limitations when compared to the real thing; for one, people cannot touch simulated robots. But what about for simpler cases where people just converse with the robot or work together on a mental task? Do people interact with these simulated robots the same as they would a real robot? Would people feel empathy for a simulated robot in the same way as they do for real robots?

We conducted a study to investigate this question, according to the following scenario:

1. A person gets to know an intelligent robot’s personality while collaboratively playing Sudoku
2. The robot gets a virus and acts increasingly strange
3. The robot expresses fear of being reset and losing its memory
4. The robot is erased by the researcher and loses its memory (Poor thing!), and re-introduces itself with a new voice.

This is scenario similar to a common movie cliché, where a protagonist has a friend who is harmed by an unpopular third party (in our case, the researcher). Based on background work in this area, we expected that people would feel sorry for the robot, feel empathy, similar to how they would for an animal or a pet. We validated our study design by comparing it to a case where the robot does not get a virus or get reset, and found that indeed people empathized more with the unfortunate robot that loses its memory.

We did this study twice: once with a real robot, and once with an identical simulated robot: same look, same voice, same actions, and same conversation. We found that people rated their empathy about 10% higher for the real robot than for the simulated one. So, if you are investigating social interactions with your robot, be wary of using simulations – the interaction may not quite be the same as the real thing.

Like any interesting result, our work raises more questions than it answers. Why does this difference exist? Is it as simple as people knowing the difference between real and fake things? Maybe we are used to seeing bad things happen in virtual worlds? Would this difference happen for positive empathy as well? Will this hold for other kinds of robots? What other social interactions are different with simulated robots? Moving forward, our team is continuing to look into these questions!

One final point – looking back, the really hard part of this work was to make a study design that is convincing, believable by the participants, and actually makes people feel sorry for the robot. This was much harder than we expected, and we ended up collaborating with a local artist company, ZenFri Inc.

So – which would you feel more sorry for: a simulated robot, or a real one? If you want to learn more about our process, or any of our results, please check out our paper or visit our project homepage.

Stela H. Seo, Denise Geiskkovitch, Masayuki Nakane, Corey King, James E. Young. “Poor Thing! Would You Feel Sorry for a Simulated Robot? A comparison of empathy toward a physical and a simulated robot,” In proceedings of the 10th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI’2015, Portland, Oregon, USA.

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• Driven by care needs, will it be the booming senior population that spurs wider acceptance of robots?
• Natural language: The de-facto interface convention for social robotics
• Should a care robot bring an alcoholic a drink? It depends on who owns the robot
• Evaluating the effectiveness of robot behaviors in human-robot interactions

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

This summer the whistle was blown on one of the most thrilling events on the international sporting calendar. It took place in Brazil and pitted teams from all over the world against each other, each hoping to make it into the history books. But no managers were fired, no grass had to be watered and certainly no one got bitten. The event was the Robocup, a tournament that sees professional footballers replaced by robots. It’s one of a number of regular tournaments for teams of programmers and robotics experts to show off their latest work.
The Robocup standard platform league matches play out on a much smaller scale than your average World Cup match. An arena of around 6 metres by 9 metres is marked out as a miniature pitch and 10, rather than 22 players file on to battle it out. The players are NAO robots, state of the art bipedal humanoid robots that stand about 60cm tall.

This is not what you might describe as a high-speed contest. The robots walk to take a kick or a tackle and, really, waddle might be a more apt word for their approach. The ball never gets lofted into the air and that’s probably for the best – a header might cause a serious malfunction.

But the game is far from boring. Sitting around the arena, boys and girls (with family standing behind) are rapt, cheering with every contact. And make no mistake, the robots are properly playing. They pass, position and defend just like human players.

On either side of the pitch a row of desks can be found. This is where the brains behind the teams sit. Behind a row of laptops, they anxiously watch their players perform. But they are not controlling the robots. These coder/managers send the command to start the players when the referee signals kick-off, but during the match the robots are completely autonomous.

This is what makes robot football so extraordinary. The robots are not just being moved around the pitch by remote control; they are making their own decisions. They control where they run (or waddle), pass the ball and shoot for the goal without any live direction from a human. Their choices are based on what they see and the position of the ball, their teammates and the opposing team.

It’s what’s inside that counts

While a team of human players often comes complete with a dazzling array of ridiculous haircuts and tattoos, it is much harder to tell a team of robots apart. All the players are physically identical – the only visible differences on a robot football pitch are coloured markings to differentiate the two teams.

But appearances can be deceptive. Under their plastic skins the teams are far from the same. Each runs completely different software that has been painstakingly crafted by the team coders. The software to make these robots play football cannot be downloaded from an app store. It has to be crafted from scratch. Football is a complex sport and there are potentially limitless strategies that a team could use to win. This is hard-core coding.

The contest is, in effect, a battle of software. All things being equal – and at the moment they pretty much are – the team with the smartest programming, coding the cleverest plays will emerge victorious. At the end of the first-half the robots are brought to a halt. At this point, the team coders can be seen furiously attacking their laptops. This is their chance to quickly modify their robots’ software after seeing how they performed in the first half. They might have as little as ten minutes to do it, which seems like a risky strategy.

There’s a chance that the coders could make a mistake that renders the robots incapable of doing anything at all, let alone play a better game, but it’s a chance worth taking. If, in the first-half, the other team breaks out some nifty new moves, running rings (perhaps literally) around their opponents, this is the best opportunity the coders will get to raise their team’s game. It’s the robot equivalent of the tough talking in the half-time dressing room.

It’s easy to see why Robocup and the FIRA world cup, the two major international competitions, are so successful. Both contests have been running since around 1996. Some teams enter every year, building tremendous experience and a sophisticated code base. And several world-leading research groups use these contests as a test-bed for new approaches to multi-robot collaboration, publishing their findings in leading robotics journals afterwards.

As a robotics competition, robot football ticks all the boxes: a game with universal appeal yet also hugely demanding for robots; it’s a fun way for young roboticists to learn robot programming, and it’s a great spectator sport too.

Acknowledgements: this article was commissioned and edited by The Conversation Technology Editor Laura Hood.

Related blog posts:
FIRA 2012 Robot World Cup to be hosted by the Bristol Robotics Lab

Last week I dropped by Aldebaran’s studio to get a glimpse of Pepper in action, and was pretty excited about this robot. But then I talked with Bruno Maisonnier, the CEO of Aldebaran. And then I got really excited: what Pepper represents is another iteration in the realization of the roboticists’ dream.

Aldebaran built Pepper for Japanese telecom company SoftBank, which will start selling the robot to consumers in Japan next February for about US $1,900. The robot will be produced by Taiwanese electronics manufacturer Foxconn (who manufactures the iPhone and other Apple products). So with the marketing presence, technical abilities, and hardware systems now at a consumer-grade quality, we’re one step closer to Rosie the Robot. Or Her. Or the Cylon uprising. Remains to be seen.

Emotional interaction, according to Bruno, is “everything.” We spoke briefly on June 13, 2014 and I was able to ask him about some of this technology, its socio-cultural impacts, and the future of this work for Aldebaran. Several years ago I had been hanging around the Paris studio of Aldebaran and had seen Romeo (and wrote about it and NAO in my book on robots), so I had some sense of what was coming, but I was not expecting the emphasis on affective computing methods that Pepper embodies.

MAISONNIER: Pepper is a fantastic dream I’ve had for years – an interactive robot you can have at home that’s still large enough to be a companion and not just a toy or a pet. At Aldebaran we have a specific concept. We want to help people with robots. We want them to be companion. To help people grow, have fun, and connect them to others.

So first you need to have a cute, nice robot – not just something to say, ‘Oh, that it is nice,’ but the essence of the robot is something that lives in your home. This is not for geeks, so design is our first and most essential part. We want a natural way to interact with the robot and not have a 200-page manual that people need to read. So we need people to be comfortable and interact easily with the robot. We humans have evolved to interact with other humanoid shapes. And sometimes, even without words you understand what the other person means and yes or no can be clearly indicated with body language. We can see if someone is saying yes but meaning no, and if you are saying yes when you are sad, or no when you are happy the message is totally different. So if I want the robot interaction to be natural the robot has to understand that.

MEADOWS: How do you do that? That’s a tall order.

MAISONNIER: These drivers for both understanding and expressing emotions are key to our design. NAO was the first emotional robot, with many possibilities, but many limitations because of its size. Pepper is a larger robot, and one of the consequences of this design decision is that it can move faster. You can have the robot follow you, or if it has to go into your bedroom to look for something it won’t take 20 minutes, and it will be able to open doors. If you want to interact with emotional context, then size is important; [Pepper’s size offers] a more human interaction, rather than talking with something the size of a mouse.

MEADOWS: Ok, but an android is a bad design for a robot because the function follows the form.

MAISSONNIER: But for Pepper the function is to interact with people. The majority of people in robotics are coming from industrial robotics; they’re building left-brain robots. I’m not interested in that. There are huge applications, but this is not what I’m interested in. We want right-brain robots for friends and companions – robots that are more like Jiminy Cricket.

MEADOWS: Here at Geppetto we feel much the same way. Now Romeo and NAO have legs. Pepper’s got wheels. Why?

MAISSONNIER: The main driver is that Pepper is an emotional robot, and we rarely use our legs for social interaction. While there are some detriments, like going up stairs, there are also benefits to the wheels, such as giving the robot a longer autonomy because it can carry a heavier battery. The goal of the robot is to help by teaching, being a health coach, monitoring, growing, etc. So it is more right-brain. Yes, the form follows function because the interaction with humans is the function. So you don’t need legs.

MEADOWS: So how are emotions used to guide the robot?

MAISSONNIER: Communication is emotion. You are an artist and know this. When you are speaking, only about 20-30% of what you say is in the words. But 70-80% is not words – all the other parts are emotions. So communication is emotion.

MEADOWS: What are the methods you’ve developed to convey this?

MAISSONNIER: We’ve invented an emotional engine that collects many different inputs and combines them in multi-modal approaches that use facial analysis, tone of voice, body language, gesture, small noises like laughter, and understanding the micro-signals that your body sends when you talk with someone. All that is feeding a higher level message, which might be that “she said yes but she means no” for example. This serves as the input to our dialogue engine, and we have an expressive engine that uses automatic body language in response. It has all the possibliities – hand, movements, sound, voice, etc – to express the correct message.

MEADOWS: Beautiful. What do you do with this platform?

MAISSONNIER: We’ve been speaking about the robot itself, and all that is part of our expertise platform, but on top of that are the applications so users or developers can build apps via our API. All that goes to the developers, who are then able to use it as they want. There are many ways to use this. For example, if you are designing an application to play chess, you can use the API to deliver messages on your chess program. The system can appear frustrated, or sense frustration at key moments in the game.

The developers are core to our strategy. Aldebaran has an app store and we confirm the quality of the app so you can download this to users, free of charge, who can download the application from the store. We have an atelier [a french term between workshop, gallery, and studio] where everyone can enter, meet with robots, experiment with them, and play with our applications. This will be the home of the developers.

MEADOWS: I love this! Perfect. Are they only online or can I visit them?

MAISSONNIER: We will have an Aldebaran Atelier in Paris, on 26 June, 2014 and two more will open in Tokyo in August. By 2015 we will have two in the US (New York and California).

MEADOWS: Changing the subject a little, you have a robot that has some incredible surveillant abilities. I think there’s a risk here in that systems may not respect privacy, or may be used for ends that don’t align with the end-user. As I’ve written about on RoboHub, where I ask if surveillance is the new business model for consumer robotics, Andy Rubin is taking the robotics effort in the same direction he took the Android effort. This not only changes the landscape for Aldebaran, but it means that you have to address questions of privacy. What Is Google doing?

MAISSONNIER: I don’t know. It is opening up the [robotics] market. They will need some time before having ready robots because the culture of software is not the culture of hardware. Google is a software company, but though they have bought these companies this is not an immediate solution. Building a $1m robot is not the same as building a $1k robot .. they will need time. Their business model, as you said, is to sell advertisements. Do you want to have a spying robot at home?

MEADOWS: Well, most of us don’t seem to mind. Many people still use Google. Why is spying on me with my email different from spying on me with my robot?

MAISSONNIER: One is autonomous. If you send your mail you don’t see it flying around your house checking your books, checking your clothes. It has to be friendly, but as important is that it needs to be your friend that can protect you. You have to be sure it is on your side.

MEADOWS: Autonomy and invisibility are quite different. And a robot can do things that a user may not perceive. After all, email could be called a spybot as easily as a bots.txt file.

MAISSONNIER: This kind of thing will exist. If other robots like Aldebaran exist then between a spying robot and a non-spying robot, people will choose the right one. People will chose and we will settle the rules that we don’t want spying robots. I don’t want them, you dont’ want them. We would put a physical bridge, a switch, that will block communication and ensure privacy. That way people can say, “I want to authorize my robot to communicate with the outside world or not.”

MSM: I hope so. Where will people be able to find Pepper?

MAISSONNIER: Thousands of Peppers will be in SoftBank stores in Japan.

MEADOWS: I understand it will be about $2000, correct?

MAISSONNIER: Yes, for Pepper standalone, after that you can get insurance, monitor modules, repair modules, content, etc. These added components can be important. For me, the next step is to add content, applications in our application store – so a huge community of people will become interested in joining our adventure.

And what an adventure it will be. We look forward to seeing what great inventions Aldebaran turns out next.

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• SoftBank + Aldebaran = Pepper
• NAO Next Gen now available for a wider audience
• My robot is smelling my dirty laundry (or, Notes on privacy, PRISM, and home service robotics)
• Robot love: Spike Jonze’s new sci-fi film ‘Her’ may be closer to reality than you think
• Is surveillance the new business model for consumer robotics?
• Deep Learning creating jobs in Apps, wearable tech and robotics

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.

As of yesterday, you can get the adorable and versatile humanoid robot NAO from Aldebaran Robotics for yourself, even if you are not an academic or a hardcore developer. According to Génération Robots, a European partner of Aldebaran Robotics, they are selling NAO Next Gen (that’s the fourth of the four versions of NAOs out there) with the starting price of 5628 €. In North America, the RobotsLab is offering NAO for $7990 – down from $16,000.

If you are a roboticist (especially an academic), you’ve surely come across NAO before at your colleagues’ labs, conferences, and exhibition booths. It’s a 25-DOF platform that has been a definite friend to researchers studying human-robot interaction (HRI).

To give you an idea, NAO was at the 9th ACE/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction last week and helped host the voting of the best video awards. On behalf of the chair of the video session, it sat on the podium and instructed the audience to clap and cheer on for the video submissions to be selected for the awards.

Apart from the fact that it has two HD cameras, four microphones, 2 hi-Fi speakers, and has been on TED more than once, this beloved robot comes with fun applications such as “NAO plays soccer”. Although I couldn’t tell you how well the application works, you can check it out for yourself from March 18th to 22nd if you’ll be attending Innorobo this year.

It’s still too pricey to be purchased as the next Christmas present for a child in your family. But it looks like that’s not what Aldebaran and  Génération intends to sell it for anyway. It’s definitely not too expensive as a platform to do HRI research on, use it to start your own robots-at-home or robots-for-entertainment business, or have it as your own personal robot because you’re just that kind of a person.

So, would you buy it? What would you use it for?

If you liked this article, you may also be interested in:

• Rethink Robotics and Aldebaran both launch robots for research, teaching and custom development
• “A Paro walks into a club…” (or, Notes on the design of automated body language)
• ICRA 2013 robot photo essay: “Anthropomatics – Technologies for humans”
• ShanghAI Lectures 2012: Lecture 10 “How the body shapes the way we think”
• Robot choreographies
• Robot Companions: Flagship funding proposal for 1 billion euro submitted
• NAO, WALL-E, PackBot and BigDog inducted into Robot Hall of Fame

See all the latest robotics news on Robohub, or sign up for our weekly newsletter.



Robot dances are often the first demo made by roboticists eager to showcase their hardware, we’ve covered many robot moves in the past. The dance in this video is impressive because of the complex motions involved and difficult balancing acts, it’s also very artistic.

To make a robot dance, you usually pre-program a set of motor commands and timings, or a so-called choreography. To start the dance, press the robot’s “start” button and launch the music at the same time. When multiple robots are dancing together, you usually need a wireless signal to wake all the robots at the same time, so the dance seems synchronized. Here the maestro might be Bruno Maisonnier’s red NAO. In most cases, robots do not listen to the music or react to one another, although there is research being done (see paper by Xia and colleagues @ CMU) to make robot dancing fully autonomous. Here are some other examples of dancers that can actually feel the beat.

http://youtu.be/VTsUim_8q9g

Even if dancing robots can’t yet make you twirl on the dance floor, they are a great vector to get students excited about robotics. I vividly remember watching QRIO dance way back when Sony was still making it. Aldebaran, the company behind the NAO robot, is actually organizing a “Robotics Idol” dance competition in California, I would have loved to participate in that as a kid!

Our colleagues at the LSRO at Switzerland’s EPFL have sent a great video of their robot Thymio converted into a sushi-go-round for their XMas party:

Colleagues at the AI Lab’s Robotics and Perception Group also sent a video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dT_UISs6Vgw

Imina Technologies brings us a choir of miBot micromanipulators.

Previously featured on Robohub, General Motors and Kiva Systems feature high-tech robots pretending to be “Santa’s little helpers”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHwGCiUOfgs&feature=share&list=PL5UWrgmuniqLsszErT_s9Gm74MGhx5AyA

Kiva’s video can be found here:
http://www.kivasystems.com/santas-high-tech-helpers/

While the industrial robots work away, Nao has been busy with his xylophone and well wishes.

Aisoy robotics brings us this fun video showing the challenges when filming robots with “personality”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYfXxlNZhGM&feature=share&list=PL-NcJDWCD71gWi4Oc1nxGHfpUePcPEP7v

And in case you missed the holiday video from ETHZ featuring balancing, flying and legged robots, here it is.

For more holiday videos, have a look at the ROBOTS Podcast’s Annual Holiday Season Video Special Youtube Playlists. To submit your own, just send us a message at christmas@robotspodcast.com!

This time, General Motors and Kiva Systems feature high-tech robots pretending to be “Santa’s little helpers”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zHwGCiUOfgs&feature=share&list=PL5UWrgmuniqLsszErT_s9Gm74MGhx5AyA

Kiva’s video can be found here:
http://www.kivasystems.com/santas-high-tech-helpers/

While the industrial robots work away, Nao has been busy with his xylophone and well wishes.

Aisoy robotics bring us this fun video showing the challenges when filming robots with “personality”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XYfXxlNZhGM&feature=share&list=PL-NcJDWCD71gWi4Oc1nxGHfpUePcPEP7v

And in case you missed the holiday video from ETHZ featuring balancing, flying and legged robots, here it is.

For more holiday videos, have a look at the ROBOTS Podcast’s Annual Holiday Season Video Special Youtube Playlists. To submit your own, just send us a message at christmas@robotspodcast.com!

Travis Deyle, is a postdoc researcher at Duke and a recent PhD from GA Tech’s School of Electrical and Computer Engineering where he was a member of the Healthcare Robotics Lab and a frequent blogger at Hizook.com. Fortunate for us, he kept a file of 2011 venture funded robotic projects and turned it into an interesting chart:

Source: Travis Deyle, Hizook.com

This chart may not reflect all of the equity investment activity in the robotics market but it is a far cry from the $6.9 billion that went into 997 venture funded deals in web and Internet startup companies over the course of 2011. This chart also doesn’t mention the many acquisitions, strategic partnerships and mergers that occurred. The most recent is the acquisition of French Cybernetix by Technip, an oil resources and ROV service provider to the industry.

Deyle describes why he thinks VC funding for robotics is a tough nut to crack:

Robotics companies have large capital requirements for robot hardware, few potential acquirers, and almost no “Google-scale” breakout success stories (i.e., IPOs). One of the best known robotics companies, iRobot, has a market cap of just $700 million. This makes robotics a difficult sell to your typical VC firm.

Although these 14 companies represent just a sliver of the 100+ robotic startups that are getting funded in one way or another, they do offer insight into those that are of interest to the venture capital community. Of the companies listed in the chart, it is interesting to note that two are foreign and the biggest investment is for a robotic hair implant device for balding men.

VGo telepresence robot, Harvest Automation’s nursery robot, Liquid Robotics’ wave glider.

1. Restoration Robotics and their new ARTAS System provide image-guided technology for hair follicle harvesting. It’s a massive market, hence the large investment. They received US FDA clearance mid-2011 and treated their first patient in August, 2011.
2. Redzone Robotics was featured by Pres. Obama last year and, in addition to the 2011 funding, received an additional $8.5 million just a few days ago. Their wastewater systems – pipe inspection and cleaning robots – provide critical environmental assistance to municipalities, contractors and engineering firms. Again, a big investment for a big marketplace.
3. Liquid Robotics and their wave gliders have been much in the news. They presently have four wave gliders traveling different paths across the Pacific and making their data available to scientists and lay people worldwide. Their gliders are valuable additions to the arsenals of scientific and environmental agencies, fisheries, aquaculture, pollution detection and resource discovery companies as well as defense/security and law enforcement agencies. Hence the large investment.
4. Aldebaran Robotics, a French company, makes the Nao and newer Romeo robots which they sell to schools and for robotic soccer and other competitions to promote STEM education, a limited but growing marketplace, hence the midrange venture investment.
5. Medrobotics is a Carnegie Mellon spin-off focused on surgical applications using flexible snake-like robotic devices for minimally-invasive procedures. Like other medical start-ups, there is a long lead time for product refinement and FDA clearances. Medrobotics has received funding in almost every year since it’s inception in 2005.
6. Tibion Corporation, is a Sunnyvale, CA start-up, providing bionic legs for stroke rehabilitation. This form of robotic-assisted rehab therapy, therapy with the use of an exoskeleton, is a big step forward from the $300,000+ fixed-position machines previously used.
7. MakerBot Industries, the 3-D printer maker for the DIY (Do-It-Yourself) crowd, and featured at Maker Faires held all over the country to mammoth and enthusiastic crowds, services the DIY, prototyping, small run, and hobby communities while more expensive 3-D printers support the additive manufacturing sector. The Maker Faire Bay Area DIY innovation festival will be held in May in San Mateo, CA.
8. Harvest Automation has a lot of good things going for it: (1) many of it’s investors are the very same ag businesses that will be buyers of the robots, (2) although focused on nursery automation to begin their business, they are poised to broaden their scope into many other facets of the ag industry, and (3) the key players are experienced in the business of robotics.
9. Orbotix is the developer of the sphero smartphone-controlled robotic ball. The ball has no buttons, no battery box, no socket or cord for a charger (although it does have a cup-like charging dock). Shake it and it glows; put it on the floor and direct it anywhere with your iPhone. It’s a Bluetooth-based, wirelessly-charged device first shown at the 2011 CES in Las Vegas. 
10. ThinkLabs is an Indian education company focused on science and technology. It uses simple robots, sensor enhanced devices, and robot competitions to provide hands-on inspiration for students taking their courses.
11. Precise Path Robotics began as an entity to participate in the 2005 DARPA Grand Challenge and has migrated it’s navigation system into robotic lawn mowing and other robotic devices to provide maintenance and conditioning robots for the golf course market.
12. VGo Communications has thus far produced 2,000 telepresence robots and plans to lower the cost to near $2,000 in their next production run. You may have seen the ABC News stories about the high school student who couldn’t leave home but nevertheless, through the use of the VGo, attended the local high school, piloting his VGo from class to class and up and down the school elevator.
13. Aethon is a Pittsburgh, PA based mobile robot company that makes robotic carts and tugs for the hospital industry… tugs to pickup and deliver food, medicine, waste materials and general supplies. The company began in 2001 and has had many rounds of financing. This round of $1.74 million was less than the $2.5 million targeted.
14. CyPhy Works, a maker of small unmanned flying robots used to inspect bridges and other public infrastructure, has also received federal grants and research awards to develop its technology for both commercial, governmental and defense clients.

Source: Travis Deyle, Hizook.com

This chart may not reflect all of the equity investment activity in the robotics market but it is a far cry from the $6.9 billion that went into 997 venture funded deals in web and Internet startup companies over the course of 2011. This chart also doesn’t mention the many acquisitions, strategic partnerships and mergers that occurred. The most recent is the acquisition of French Cybernetix by Technip, an oil resources and ROV service provider to the industry.

Deyle describes why he thinks VC funding for robotics is a tough nut to crack:

Robotics companies have large capital requirements for robot hardware, few potential acquirers, and almost no “Google-scale” breakout success stories (i.e., IPOs). One of the best known robotics companies, iRobot, has a market cap of just $700 million. This makes robotics a difficult sell to your typical VC firm.

Although these 14 companies represent just a sliver of the 100+ robotic startups that are getting funded in one way or another, they do offer insight into those that are of interest to the venture capital community. Of the companies listed in the chart, it is interesting to note that two are foreign and the biggest investment is for a robotic hair implant device for balding men.

VGo telepresence robot, Harvest Automation’s nursery robot, Liquid Robotics’ wave glider.

1. Restoration Robotics and their new ARTAS System provide image-guided technology for hair follicle harvesting. It’s a massive market, hence the large investment. They received US FDA clearance mid-2011 and treated their first patient in August, 2011.
2. Redzone Robotics was featured by Pres. Obama last year and, in addition to the 2011 funding, received an additional $8.5 million just a few days ago. Their wastewater systems – pipe inspection and cleaning robots – provide critical environmental assistance to municipalities, contractors and engineering firms. Again, a big investment for a big marketplace.
3. Liquid Robotics and their wave gliders have been much in the news. They presently have four wave gliders traveling different paths across the Pacific and making their data available to scientists and lay people worldwide. Their gliders are valuable additions to the arsenals of scientific and environmental agencies, fisheries, aquaculture, pollution detection and resource discovery companies as well as defense/security and law enforcement agencies. Hence the large investment.
4. Aldebaran Robotics, a French company, makes the Nao and newer Romeo robots which they sell to schools and for robotic soccer and other competitions to promote STEM education, a limited but growing marketplace, hence the midrange venture investment.
5. Medrobotics is a Carnegie Mellon spin-off focused on surgical applications using flexible snake-like robotic devices for minimally-invasive procedures. Like other medical start-ups, there is a long lead time for product refinement and FDA clearances. Medrobotics has received funding in almost every year since it’s inception in 2005.
6. Tibion Corporation, is a Sunnyvale, CA start-up, providing bionic legs for stroke rehabilitation. This form of robotic-assisted rehab therapy, therapy with the use of an exoskeleton, is a big step forward from the $300,000+ fixed-position machines previously used.
7. MakerBot Industries, the 3-D printer maker for the DIY (Do-It-Yourself) crowd, and featured at Maker Faires held all over the country to mammoth and enthusiastic crowds, services the DIY, prototyping, small run, and hobby communities while more expensive 3-D printers support the additive manufacturing sector. The Maker Faire Bay Area DIY innovation festival will be held in May in San Mateo, CA.
8. Harvest Automation has a lot of good things going for it: (1) many of it’s investors are the very same ag businesses that will be buyers of the robots, (2) although focused on nursery automation to begin their business, they are poised to broaden their scope into many other facets of the ag industry, and (3) the key players are experienced in the business of robotics.
9. Orbotix is the developer of the sphero smartphone-controlled robotic ball. The ball has no buttons, no battery box, no socket or cord for a charger (although it does have a cup-like charging dock). Shake it and it glows; put it on the floor and direct it anywhere with your iPhone. It’s a Bluetooth-based, wirelessly-charged device first shown at the 2011 CES in Las Vegas.
10. ThinkLabs is an Indian education company focused on science and technology. It uses simple robots, sensor enhanced devices, and robot competitions to provide hands-on inspiration for students taking their courses.
11. Precise Path Robotics began as an entity to participate in the 2005 DARPA Grand Challenge and has migrated it’s navigation system into robotic lawn mowing and other robotic devices to provide maintenance and conditioning robots for the golf course market.
12. VGo Communications has thus far produced 2,000 telepresence robots and plans to lower the cost to near $2,000 in their next production run. You may have seen the ABC News stories about the high school student who couldn’t leave home but nevertheless, through the use of the VGo, attended the local high school, piloting his VGo from class to class and up and down the school elevator.
13. Aethon is a Pittsburgh, PA based mobile robot company that makes robotic carts and tugs for the hospital industry… tugs to pickup and deliver food, medicine, waste materials and general supplies. The company began in 2001 and has had many rounds of financing. This round of $1.74 million was less than the $2.5 million targeted.

1. CyPhy Works, a maker of small unmanned flying robots used to inspect bridges and other public infrastructure, has also received federal grants and research awards to develop its technology for both commercial, governmental and defense clients.

“Smart” (robotic-like) products profess to add value, assure safety, and provide convenience through connectivity… claims that in many cases are true, particularly with in-car infotainment systems.

3,100 exhibitors, 1.86 million sq ft of exhibition space, 153,000 attendees of which 34,000 were international and only one good food stand (Nathan’s hot dogs – you can’t ruin a Nathan’s hot dog). Massive crowding, slow moving, loud, extravagant and wonderful. Thin TVs – so thin they looked like they couldn’t stand up by themselves without bending – 3D with and without glasses, projectors, smart appliances, and apps for everything from TVs to refrigerators to scales.

Consumer robotics represented a very small part of CES but had the same combination of glitz, glamour, marvelous stuff, misrepresentation, uninspiring products and hidden gems, just like the rest of CES. Robotics Trends hosted a Robotics Tech Zone but the action was well beyond their purview because many of the companies wanted to emphasize their consumer orientation instead of highlighting the robotic.

Romibo

One of the most interesting areas was focused on Digital Health – where one could easily see benefits from sensors and smart apps providing data for the cloud to process and selectively inform doctors or users of the results, and progress over time. The highlight of the area was Life Technologies $150,000 Ion Proton Genetic Sequencer, which, by the end of the year, will be able to sequence an entire human genome for about $1,000 in a few hours. Digital Health was also the only area where research was shown and where the NSF/Carnegie Mellon University Quality of Life Technology booth was located, an area packed with healthcare inventions and eager young inventors. Few fell under the robotics umbrella (most were digital apps and devices) except these three:

1. Romibo, a do-it-yourself robot for therapy, education and play.
2. PerMMA, a personal mobility and manipulation appliance for power wheelchair users.
3. Myomo, rehabilitation robotics and interactive gaming systems for stroke victim rehab.

Certainly the most publicity went to Tosy Robotics, a Vietnamese manufacturer of robotic and high-tech toys, for the launch of  their new mRobo, a transformer-type boom-box entertainment robot with a two-hour meet-and-greet by teen heartthrob Justin Bieber.

Tosy also showed their other robotic toys: DiscoRobo, a dance to the beat with lights toy, and Sket-Robo, a robot that draws.

Cubelets, $160, by Modular Robotics, had a small booth and a big hit for their educational robot construction kit. These magnetic blocks can be snapped together to make an endless variety of robots with no programming and no wires. Since each cube has unique functions, you can build robots that drive around on a tabletop and respond to light, sound and temperature.

Parrot, a French manufacturer of hands-free wireless devices for cars and phones, was the hit of CES 2010 with their AR.Drone, a quadcopter with two cameras that is driven from an iPhone or iTouch. This year they upgraded the camera to enable hi-def video, improved their software for still and video capture, and added a range of games and customization accessories… all shown at a huge outdoor booth at CES.

iRobot launched their Roomba, Scooba, Verro and Looj vacuums, floor washers, pool cleaners and gutter cleaning robots at previous CES’s, but at this CES they only had office visits for demos and marketing where they were also showing off their AVA concept robot and promoting their partnership with InTouch Health, a provider of telepresence collaboration for doctors, nurses, paramedics and patients and a place where iRobot’s lower cost AVA robots could be armed with InTouch Health’s hospital experiences and enable the resulting systems to be available to a larger audience.

More than 7 million robot vacuum cleaners have been sold thus far with real competition for iRobot showing up recently with a flurry of similar cleaners – all displayed at CES:

Look-alikes: (from left to right): Techko Maid, Agait, Ecovacs, xRobot, iclebo and Ottoro

iRobot Roomba, LG RoboKing, Samsung Tango The big news is that both Samsung and Ecovacs (above) offer a self-emptying dustbin option.

But LG and Samsung entered the arena, and, with their large consumer client base, vast manufacturing and marketing resources, and an array of add-on features, has been selling their vacuums in Asia and Europe; not yet in the US. iRobot should feel their presence very soon.

Another consumer products manufacturer (of home theater systems), South Korean Moneual, also sells a robot vacuum and a more interesting $1,000 home mobile air filter / security device. The mobile air filter is also designed as a safety system for the elderly, it connects with a wrist band that can detect a fall and can call for help if one occurs.

A skinless Pleo showing it’s complex innards

Pleo, the baby robotic dinosaur, was represented by both the seller (Innvo Labs) and the manufacturer (Jetta Co. Ltd.) that reincarnated the old bankrupt company, and was showing the new Pleo rb (reborn), with accessories and software enhancements.

Amongst the pseudo robotic products were three which act as a pedestal for the camera and video functions of iPhones and swivel or have wheels or tracks to move as wirelessly directed:

1. Xybotyx, a Colorado start-up, is launching a $111 wheeled platform and app for your iPhone that lets you drive your phone wirelessly.
2. Swivl by Satarii, is a $159 stationary platform for your iPhone camera or video. It swivels to follow you or can be remote controlled.
3. Romo by Romotive, is a $99 tracter-like iPhone holder which can stream video to your PC and also dance to music on your iPhone.

Karotz, by Violet (a subsidiary of Aldebaran, the builder of the Nao robot), announced the launch of their Karotz “intelligent internet companion” into the U.S. market with a $99 special price for the rabbit and 30% off all accessories. Ideal for learning how to develop apps with voice recognition and Internet connectivity, and now with Aldebaran stewardship, this interesting little device may hold a key to the future of human-robot communication.

Other vendors under the robotic umbrella included:

(from left to right): Windoro, Sphero, Ladybug, Mantarobot, Paro, Crawler

• Windoro, from Ilshim Global, a window washing device.
• Sphero, by Orbotix, a robotic ball controlled from your phone.
• Ladybug, by JS-Robotics, a bug-like mobile device with collision avoidance sensors.
• Mantaro telepresence robot, a mobile Skype platform using your own iPhone or iPad.
• Paro, the therapeutic furry seal-like bot for hospitals and eldercare.
• Crawler, by Topy Industries, an experimental tractor-like base for search and rescue.

Not exactly robotic, but for prototyping and DIY’ers, there were three 3D printers of note: Makerbot announced their new $1,750 two-color 3D printer, Essential Dynamics showed their $3,000 Imagine Printer that prints with a whole host of materials, including food, chocolates, silicone, cheese, epoxy, organics, etc., and the Cube from Cubify which offers both a $1,300 3D printer and also a service for those that just want to send their designs in and get back the finished product.

So there you have it — 25+ robot vendors focused on consumer products — less than 1% of CES — and perhaps only one or two to rave about. Maybe next year….

“Smart” (robotic-like) products profess to add value, assure safety, and provide convenience through connectivity — claims that in many cases are true, particularly with in-car infotainment systems.

3,100 exhibitors, 1.86 million sq ft of exhibition space, 153,000 attendees of which 34,000 were international and only one good food stand (Nathan’s hot dogs – you can’t ruin a Nathan’s hot dog). Massive crowding, slow moving, loud, extravagant and wonderful. Thin TVs – so thin they looked like they couldn’t stand up by themselves without bending – 3D with and without glasses, projectors, smart appliances, and apps for everything from TVs to refrigerators to scales.

Consumer robotics represented a very small part of CES but had the same combination of glitz, glamour, marvelous stuff, misrepresentation, uninspiring products and hidden gems, just like the rest of CES. Robotics Trends hosted a Robotics Tech Zone but the action was well beyond their purview because many of the companies wanted to emphasize their consumer orientation instead of highlighting the robotic.

Romibo

One of the most interesting areas was focused on Digital Health – where one could easily see benefits from sensors and smart apps providing data for the cloud to process and selectively inform doctors or users of the results, and progress over time. The highlight of the area was Life Technologies $150,000 Ion Proton Genetic Sequencer, which, by the end of the year, will be able to sequence an entire human genome for about $1,000 in a few hours. Digital Health was also the only area where research was shown and where the NSF/Carnegie Mellon University Quality of Life Technology booth was located, an area packed with healthcare inventions and eager young inventors. Few fell under the robotics umbrella (most were digital apps and devices) except these three:

1. Romibo, a do-it-yourself robot for therapy, education and play.
2. PerMMA, a personal mobility and manipulation appliance for power wheelchair users.
3. Myomo, rehabilitation robotics and interactive gaming systems for stroke victim rehab.

Certainly the most publicity went to Tosy Robotics, a Vietnamese manufacturer of robotic and high-tech toys, for the launch of  their new mRobo, a transformer-type boom-box entertainment robot with a two-hour meet-and-greet by teen heartthrob Justin Bieber.

Tosy also showed their other robotic toys: DiscoRobo, a dance to the beat with lights toy, and Sket-Robo, a robot that draws.

Cubelets, $160, by Modular Robotics, had a small booth and a big hit for their educational robot construction kit. These magnetic blocks can be snapped together to make an endless variety of robots with no programming and no wires. Since each cube has unique functions, you can build robots that drive around on a tabletop and respond to light, sound and temperature.

Parrot, a French manufacturer of hands-free wireless devices for cars and phones, was the hit of CES 2010 with their AR.Drone, a quadcopter with two cameras that is driven from an iPhone or iTouch. This year they upgraded the camera to enable hi-def video, improved their software for still and video capture, and added a range of games and customization accessories… all shown at a huge outdoor booth at CES.

iRobot launched their Roomba, Scooba, Verro and Looj vacuums, floor washers, pool cleaners and gutter cleaning robots at previous CES’s, but at this CES they only had office visits for demos and marketing where they were also showing off their AVA concept robot and promoting their partnership with InTouch Health, a provider of telepresence collaboration for doctors, nurses, paramedics and patients and a place where iRobot’s lower cost AVA robots could be armed with InTouch Health’s hospital experiences and enable the resulting systems to be available to a larger audience.

More than 7 million robot vacuum cleaners have been sold thus far with real competition for iRobot showing up recently with a flurry of similar cleaners – all displayed at CES:

Look-alikes: (from left to right): Techko Maid, Agait, Ecovacs, xRobot, iclebo and Ottoro

iRobot Roomba, LG RoboKing, Samsung Tango The big news is that both Samsung and Ecovacs (above) offer a self-emptying dustbin option.

But LG and Samsung entered the arena, and, with their large consumer client base, vast manufacturing and marketing resources, and an array of add-on features, has been selling their vacuums in Asia and Europe; not yet in the US. iRobot should feel their presence very soon.

Another consumer products manufacturer (of home theater systems), South Korean Moneual, also sells a robot vacuum and a more interesting $1,000 home mobile air filter / security device. The mobile air filter is also designed as a safety system for the elderly, it connects with a wrist band that can detect a fall and can call for help if one occurs.

A skinless Pleo showing it’s complex innards

Pleo, the baby robotic dinosaur, was represented by both the seller (Innvo Labs) and the manufacturer (Jetta Co. Ltd.) that reincarnated the old bankrupt company, and was showing the new Pleo rb (reborn), with accessories and software enhancements.

Amongst the pseudo robotic products were three which act as a pedestal for the camera and video functions of iPhones and swivel or have wheels or tracks to move as wirelessly directed:

1. Xybotyx, a Colorado start-up, is launching a $111 wheeled platform and app for your iPhone that lets you drive your phone wirelessly.
2. Swivl by Satarii, is a $159 stationary platform for your iPhone camera or video. It swivels to follow you or can be remote controlled.
3. Romo by Romotive, is a $99 tracter-like iPhone holder which can stream video to your PC and also dance to music on your iPhone.

Karotz, by Violet (a subsidiary of Aldebaran, the builder of the Nao robot), announced the launch of their Karotz “intelligent internet companion” into the U.S. market with a $99 special price for the rabbit and 30% off all accessories. Ideal for learning how to develop apps with voice recognition and Internet connectivity, and now with Aldebaran stewardship, this interesting little device may hold a key to the future of human-robot communication.

Other vendors under the robotic umbrella included:

(from left to right): Windoro, Sphero, Ladybug, Mantarobot, Paro, Crawler

• Windoro, from Ilshim Global, a window washing device.
• Sphero, by Orbotix, a robotic ball controlled from your phone.
• Ladybug, by JS-Robotics, a bug-like mobile device with collision avoidance sensors.
• Mantaro telepresence robot, a mobile Skype platform using your own iPhone or iPad.
• Paro, the therapeutic furry seal-like bot for hospitals and eldercare.
• Crawler, by Topy Industries, an experimental tractor-like base for search and rescue.

Not exactly robotic, but for prototyping and DIY’ers, there were three 3D printers of note: Makerbot announced their new $1,750 two-color 3D printer, Essential Dynamics showed their $3,000 Imagine Printer that prints with a whole host of materials, including food, chocolates, silicone, cheese, epoxy, organics, etc., and the Cube from Cubify which offers both a $1,300 3D printer and also a service for those that just want to send their designs in and get back the finished product.

So there you have it — 25+ robot vendors focused on consumer products — less than 1% of CES — and perhaps only one or two to rave about. Maybe next year….

In July of 2008, the app store concept was launched by Apple and it has dramatically changed the mobile industry. Over 1.2 billion apps were downloaded between Christmas and New Year according to Flurry Analytics. That’s about 60 percent higher than every week of December before Christmas, and marks the largest number of apps ever downloaded in a single week.

Robot app stores are now beginning to happen as well and visions of apps for tele-robotic safety and surveillance pop into mind, or light domestic duties, or…? My imagination runs wild at the thought and I imagine these new apps being easy to use, having multiple functions and a low cost.

But that is then and now is now. At present there are three significantly different approaches to an app store for robots (although additional “stores” are in the planning stage and many existing stores are making arrangements to expand beyond their own boundaries (like iRobot’s online store and Willow Garage’s application chooser)):

1. MyRobots, by Canadian RobotShop, has opened a combination app store and online environment to permit robotics products to be monitored and updated seamlessly as well as providing a Cloud repository for applications that run from the Cloud instead of the robot itself. MyRobots’ slogan is “Connect your robots; reap the benefits.” The online monitoring aspect of MyRobots is similar to the MyMotoman Remote Monitoring Service initiated my Yaskawa Motoman America in August.
2. Robots App Store, by San Francisco serial entrepreneur Elad Inbar, is developing their store to be an online marketplace for selling apps and also providing developers their own sales portal. Robots App Store, in addition to attempting to trademark the hyphenated words “Robot-app”, has a wonderfully informative info-graphic explaining the need and market for robot apps. What it doesn’t explain is how the process will be different than what most of us have come to expect when buying apps from Apple’s App Store. It involves tinkering with development tools and operating system platforms – a turnoff for all but the most avid hobbyist.
3. RoboEarth, an EU public-private consortium, is using the Internet to create a giant open source network and database repository that can be accessed and updated by robots around the world. Focused more on academia and industrial applications, RoboEarth speeds up robot learning and adaption in complex tasks and can execute tasks that were not explicitly planned for when the robot was designed.

Service robotics – as differentiated from industrial or defense/security/space robotics – needs to provide inexpensive and efficient assistance to humans to be profitable in the consumer marketplace and emerge as a serious industry. We already have vacuum robots and adaptive cruise control bots, but there are thousands of other possible applications. Entertainment, embedded systems, eldercare and home assistance are certain to be amongst the first groups to benefit as the service robotics industry materializes.

There are two different approaches to providing those services:

C3P0 The Ultimate Humanoid Robot

1. A universal robotic tool that will be able to perform all the tasks we ask it to do, including social communication – a robot like C3P0. This is the goal of humanoid robots. At this time, humanoid robots are costly, difficult to control, slow and intrusive. Although human-robot communication is part of the lure, and there is much progress in that area, we are at least five years away from devices that not only speak but understand. IBM’s Watson and Apple’s Siri are proving that it can be done but their software isn’t yet available to front-end robotic applications and there is, at present, little comparable in the robotics world (although the recent ABC Nightline interview of Hanson Robotics’ Philip Dick robot shows there is serious ongoing development). Even when the two-way communication aspect is further developed and made available to roboticists, it will be many more years until the goal of a C3P0-like sophisticated humanoid robot will be ready.

• A more near-term and progressive solution is to forego universality and design specific devices that provide limited, task-specific means to communicate and complete specific tasks… think Roomba.

Certainly #2 has more near-term promise and is where most of the market is focused for the rest of this decade. As service robots begin to meet the four core criteria of low cost, low intrusiveness, safety and modularity – which is happening almost daily with technology changes – an incredible number of opportunities for service robot apps can be foreseen. The key will be to make them practical, affordable and acceptable by humans as part of their day-to-day life.

Robots App Store:

At discussions with Elad Inbar, CEO of Robots App Store, I asked about the size of the marketplace and was surprised to find that there are 14 million service robots out there now, and it’s estimatited that by the end of 2014 there will be 24 million. If only 15% of them were able to buy two apps at an average price of $9.99, that’s $72 million in revenue. If they each bought five apps instead of two, the figure would be $180 million. If 20% purchased five apps it would be a $¼ billion business. How real and applicable those figures are depends on many complex variables: willingness of the buyer to tinker, quality of the apps, flexibility of the robots, price, disposable income, etc. In fact, apps for robots with an Apple or Android front end will not be available in the Robots App Store but will onlybe available through the Apple (or Android) App Store – which limits the market metrics… an example of this Apple exclusivity is the hundreds of thousands of Parrot’s AR.Drone quadcopters.

Regardless of the metrics, the process of developing and sharing apps can provide a giant leap toward rejuvenating the robots we have and teaching the audience (the buyers) that they can get what they want from their robot(s). Thus the buyer becomes more educated and demanding and the producers less capricious — and more profitable.

From an infographic by Robots App Store showing possible app prices for various robots

Inbar’s Robots App Store is “focused solely on the personal and service robots marketplace because “industrial robots are very limited in their functionality… not to mention that they are oriented to quickly repeat the same tasks 24/7 unlike personal and service robots that can be extended to virtually everything! I believe in the consumers market – as they will grow like a hockey-stick!”

When I asked what kind of apps we will see once the store opens, Elad said, “We have more than 100 approved robotic developers working on apps for Romba, Pleo, AIBO, NAO, DARwin and others arranged in categories like Entertainment (dances, etc.), Story Telling (for kids), Utilities (like home search engines), Tools (like face recognition and such) and many others.”

Finally, I asked about the mechanics of porting an app or game from one robot to another. “ROS by Willow Garage, Gostai, URBI and others are trying to build a standard open platform OS that will run across all robots. We, as a marketplace, don’t take sides in this battle. We are serving every robot, ever developer, and every OS. But surely we’ll have to take sides one day when the critical mass will decide which is the widely spread and used OS…. Personally I believe that ROS is in the best position to become the de-facto standard and I personally love to work with their code. It is easy, simple and their libraries can be ported quickly between different robots – a huge advantage for every robot apps developer.”

MyRobots:

The goal for MyRobots is to get all robotic platforms to collaborate and operate together (regardless of their operating system) via the use of Cloud robotics. Although like other stores MyRobots will sell downloadable apps too, their main interest is to develop applications that will run on the Cloud thereby freeing computation time and resources on the robot and will make a single app compatible with many different robotic platforms.

Says MyRobot’s Mario Tremblay:

Cloud Robotics is the application of the cloud computing concept to robots. This means using the Internet to augment the robots capabilities by off-loading computation and providing services on demand. Being connected to the cloud also helps robots to collaborate with other machines, smart objects and humans. Through this collaboration, robots transcend their physical limitations and become more useful and capable since they can delegate parts of their tasks to more suitable parties. By combining increased communication capabilities to the ability and flexibility of running and storing part of their intelligence (i.e. software, behaviors and apps) on the MyRobots infrastructure, smart objects and robots become augmented and constitute a new and revolutionary concept for the future of robotic intelligence: Cloud Robotics.

RoboEarth:

RoboEarth is an EU-funded consortium of educators, research facilities and corporations working together to provide a world-wide-web for robot applications. RoboEarth, in development for the last two years, can be seen as a giant network and database repository where robots share information and learn from each other about their behavior and environment thereby showing a better way of robot collaboration and information sharing. RoboEarth’s premise is to out-source application development by tapping creativity and experience from wherever they can. Further, they believe (as do I) that more apps sold equates to more robots sold. Quoting Markus Waibel:

The central beauty of the App Store idea is that it enables a feedback cycle: The more devices (phones/robots) you sell, the more lucrative the app store becomes for 3rd party developers to program new apps. And the more new apps, the more devices you sell. In my opinion, robotics does not yet have critical mass to jump start this at the present time.

RoboEarth is fast becoming a large shared repository for maps, object models, task descriptions, robot models, semantic relations, probabilistic relations and “action recipes” (apps) within the global academic community. It remains to be seen whether the big robot manufacturers will embrace the technology for their products.

One unintended consequence of RoboEarth’s efforts may be within the used robots marketplace. Imagine the financial gain if an older, unused robot is rejiggered to have new equipment as well as easy to train software to put the robot back to work on new projects. Another possible beneficiary is the end user who will be less likely to retain an intergrator/consulting service if the robot can handle ongoing changes on its own.

The ultimate goal of RoboEarth is to enable robots to share and store what they discover about the world on their own Internet.

As a personal aside, I live in a rural area outside of a medium-sized city. 4G LTE is planned for 2012-2013 for the city but not my area and I have to pay for a very unreliable T1 line to my office. It’s hard to imagine having a service robot doing its thing in my world while relying on the Cloud (as represented by my T1). Maybe the concept will grow on me with time but right now I’m wary and a bit afraid of the consequences.

What do you want from a robot app store? Let’s compile a long list of “wants” and send them off to these app stores and see whether they can get them for us. Why should we wait to see if our app magically appears in their store? Let’s ask for what we want. Send them to me and I’ll combine them all and send them off to the stores.

Here’s what I would like:

• For my old Pleo, anything that makes it do things it doesn’t already do.
• For my AR.Drone, a programmable camera shoot over a grid that I draw onscreen from a starting point where I place the drone.
• For my little iSobot, a complicated routine of fetch, grab and return.
• And for my new Swivl, something sexy where it follows my girlfriend around the room and refocuses as the distance changes.

But I also want to buy a used two-armed Yaskawa Motoman and put it to work in my workshop doing ad hoc tasks. I’d love to be able to add a hardware component add-on (or two), be able to use ROS or some simulation software to test my apps, buy some additional apps that do the kind of tasks I need to do in the shop, and have all that work seamlessly and without line-for-line coding, excessive cost or too much fiddling.

What do you want? Send them to me and I’ll combine them all and send them off to the stores.

Link to audio file (25:07)

Today’s episode was recorded at ICRA in Anchorage Alaska, one of the major conferences in robotics with a 1575 head count and 857 papers. At the robot exhibit, we met with the Vice President in Engineering of French-based company Aldebaran, Luc Degaudenzi and with his colleague Cédric Vaudel who is the Sales Manager for North America. Aldebaran makes the Nao humanoid robot which has been seen at Robocup, showing off his soccer skills. We also talk with Nao in our first ever interview of a robot! Nao will be presenting himself and his version of Star Wars.

Nao

Listen in to our podcast where Nao will present himself and tell us a story in our first interview ever with a robot!

Nao has four microphones fitted into his head and a voice recognition and analysis system. He can also express himself by reading out any file stored locally in his storage space or captured from a web site of RSS flow. Nao sees by means of two CMOS 640 x 480 cameras, which can capture up to 30 images per second. He can react to touch by means of a capacitive sensor placed on the top of his head. Finally, Nao can communicate through infrared senders/receivers or also by logging on to your local network via Wi-Fi.

Luc Degaudenzi

Luc Degaudenzi is director of research and development at Aldebaran Robotics where he manages a crowd of around 40 people working on electronics, mechatronics and fun software for the Nao robot. Before working at Aldebaran, Degaudenzi worked in the mobile phone sector as technical and program director at Matra, Alcatel and Sony Ericsson. He’ll be telling us about the Nao platform, its possibilities and its first kicks at Robocup.

Cédric Vaudel

Cédric Vaudel is North America Sales Manager at Aldebaran Robotics.

After working for IBM for several years, he decided to take part in the robolution. Now, he coordinates business priorities and strategy deployment of Aldebaran Robotics in the whole region of America. He’ll be telling us about the origins of the name Nao and where he thinks the Humanoid market will be going in the future!

Links:

• Download mp3 (14.9 MB)
• Subscribe to Robots using iTunes
• Subscribe to Robots using RSS
• Nao’s Homepage
• Aldebaran’s Homepage

Latest News:

For more information on this episode’s news, including a video of ABB’s robot drummer as well as details on the promising echolocation device for robots and the 4 nanometer robot, visit the Robots Forum.