Advertisement
Wow, I'm sincerely impressed - the Robotics Institute of Carnegie Mellon U. has jumped a pretty significant hurdle recently in "cognitive scene recognition" - they realized that by synergistically intersecting camera viewpoint, object classification, and surface geometry recognition, has finally overcome some of the most significant hurdles of robotic visual data processing.
So, basically, now visual systems don't have to worry about getting confused by "normal" things which our brains differentiate between daily (for instance, it won't confuse a window midway up a building from a car because of similar geometry, etc, because it actually takes it's position vs. the ground level into account before running it past object classification...
I'm honestly not too suprised by this news, however, and it frankly makes me scratch my head like, "How were they figuring it was going to work before they figured this out?" I'm happy, however, that these cognitive scientists have finally made the full leap into the three-dimensional universe.
But I have to give credit where credit is due; thanks to them, future robotic systems will now thankfully avoid thinking cars are smashed into buildings, and are one step closer to being able to actually smash cars into buildings because they can now discern the difference between the two sets of parameters in context with each other...
Coupled with Toyota's soon expected launch of mass-produced "personal robots", we should soon be actually seeing these little buggers trucking around on our streets (w/i the next 5 years or so)...
Now the question is; when you get one, will you put a lowjack system in it to keep "tech gangs" from ganking your hardware or just keep them around the house to do your laundry? ;)
So, basically, now visual systems don't have to worry about getting confused by "normal" things which our brains differentiate between daily (for instance, it won't confuse a window midway up a building from a car because of similar geometry, etc, because it actually takes it's position vs. the ground level into account before running it past object classification...
I'm honestly not too suprised by this news, however, and it frankly makes me scratch my head like, "How were they figuring it was going to work before they figured this out?" I'm happy, however, that these cognitive scientists have finally made the full leap into the three-dimensional universe.
But I have to give credit where credit is due; thanks to them, future robotic systems will now thankfully avoid thinking cars are smashed into buildings, and are one step closer to being able to actually smash cars into buildings because they can now discern the difference between the two sets of parameters in context with each other...
Coupled with Toyota's soon expected launch of mass-produced "personal robots", we should soon be actually seeing these little buggers trucking around on our streets (w/i the next 5 years or so)...
Now the question is; when you get one, will you put a lowjack system in it to keep "tech gangs" from ganking your hardware or just keep them around the house to do your laundry? ;)
posted by:
|
|
Unsubscribed |
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: Scene Recognition Hurdle
Sun, August 27, 2006 - 9:26 PMI took I courses in University over 25 years ago and in a way we haven't come very far. In the early days the AI people thought that they could just brute force compute the way through anything. They waited for faster computeres then found out that they needed more computation resources than was possible. Then finally they started to get smart about things. -
-
Re: Scene Recognition Hurdle
Sun, August 27, 2006 - 9:40 PMIts true, the slowdown in AI research has been primarily due to a major decrease in government funding in the 70's-80s-90s. They went from 10,000,000 dollar super computers to 1000 dollar workstations for general research over the course of that time period. However, despite that, there has been significant progress in the areas of machine learning (improvements in statistical methods), knowledge bases(cyc, internet based semantic extraction), logic processing (X-L knowledge bases, english-like logic languages, deductive databases, tabling algorithms), natural language (mostly due to improvements in ML), and most importantly brain science (too numerous to mention).
The bottom line is, when the background knowledge is there,its just a matter of time before someone makes the leap.
As for this particular result - I am happy but not terribly impressed. There seems to be a cornucopia of results that are based in more and more complex statistical models of specific phenomenon. This can be extended virtually infinitum and are therefore somewhat supurfluous at this point.
The true breakthrough will be when those models no longer need to be explicitly defined by the designer.
-
