Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Experiments in design synthesis when behavior is determined by shape

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Personal and Ubiquitous Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

As we rapidly approach the day of transitive materials, made of individual elements that sense and actuate and can be programmed and reprogrammed, it is time to think about how to design things using these new materials. Our roBlocks construction kit toy teaching children about emergent behavior in complex systems serves as an example for investigating the challenges of designing things made of transitive materials. The roBlocks kit comprises heterogeneous modular robotics components that exhibit modularity, one-to-one mapping between form and behavior, and non-hierarchical control; and these features make it appropriate for experimenting with emergent behavior. However, as the numbers of robotic components scales to the orders of magnitude needed to consider them as material these same features also make it difficult to apply traditional methods to design constructions with desired behaviors. To understand this design space we built, the Erstwhile Agent that uses an evolutionary approach to automatically synthesize roBlocks constructions to meet specified desiderata.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Goldstein SC, Campbell JD, Mowry TC (2005) Programmable matter. IEEE Comput 38(6):99–101

    Google Scholar 

  2. Murata S et al (2002) M-TRAN: self-reconfigurable modular robotic system. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 7(4):431–441

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  3. Nagpal R (2002) Self-assembling global shape, using ideas from biology and origami. In: Hull T (ed) Origami3:3rd international meeting of origami science, mathematics and technology (3OSME). A.K. Peters, pp 219–231

  4. Rus D, Vona M (2000) A physical implementation of the self-reconfiguring crystalline robot, in Intl Conf Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp 1726–1732

  5. Støy K, Lyder A, Garcia RFM, Christensen D (2007) Hierarchical robots, in workshop on self-reconfiguring robots at intelligent robots and systems (IROS). IEEE, San Diego

  6. Yim M, Duff D, Roufas K (2000) PolyBot: a modular reconfigurable robot, in international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA). IEEE, San Francisco, pp 515–519

  7. Harel I (1991) Children designers: interdisciplinary constructions for learning, knowing mathematics in a Computer-Rich School. Ablex Publishing Corporation, Norwood

    Google Scholar 

  8. Papert S (1980) Mindstorms: children, computers, and powerful ideas. Basic Books, Inc., New York

    Google Scholar 

  9. Resnick M, Silverman B (2005) Some reflections on designing construction kits for kids, in interaction design and children (IDC). ACM, Boulder, pp 117–122

    Google Scholar 

  10. Watanabe R et al. (2004) The soul of activecube – implementing a flexible, multimodal, three-dimensional spatial tangible interface, in Proceedings of ACM SIGCHI international conference on advanced computer entertainment technology ACE 2004, pp. 173–180

  11. Anderson D, Frankel J., Marks J., Agarwala A., Beardsley P, Hodgins J, Leigh D, Ryall K, Sullivan E, Yedidia J (2000) Tangible Interaction + Graphical Interpretation: a new approach to 3D modeling, in SIGGRAPH 2000. ACM. pp 393–402

  12. McNerney TS (2004) From turtles to tangible programming bricks: explorations in physical language design. Personal Ubiquitous Comput 8:326–337

    Google Scholar 

  13. Schweikardt E (2008) Designing modular robots. PhD dissertation, computational design, Carnegie Mellon University

  14. Schweikardt E, Gross M (2008) The robot is the program: interacting with roBlocks. In Tangible, embedded interaction. ACM, Bonn

    Google Scholar 

  15. Schweikardt E, Gross MD (2006) roBlocks: a robotic construction kit for mathematics and science education. In: International conference on multimodal interfaces (ICMI). ACM, Banff, pp 72–75

  16. Schweikardt E, Gross MD (2007) A brief survey of distributed computational toys. In: First IEEE workshop on digital game and intelligent toy enhanced learning (DIGITEL). Jhongli Taiwan, pp 57–64

  17. Schweikardt E, Gross MD (2008) Learning about complexity with modular robots. In: The 2nd IEEE international workshop on digital game and intelligent toy enhanced learning. IEEE, Banff, pp 116–123

  18. Braitenberg V (1984) Vehicles: experiments in synthetic psychology. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bentley P (ed) (1999) Evolutionary design by computers. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco

  20. Funes P, Pollack J (1997) Computer evolution of buildable objects for evolutionary design by computers. In: Phil Husbands I H (ed) Fourth European conference on artificial life. MIT Press, Cambridge

  21. Cagan J, Campbell MI, Finger S, Tomiyama T (2005) A Framework for computational design synthesis: model and applications. J Comput Inf Sci Eng 5(3):171–181

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Sharkey NE, Heemskerk J (1997) The neural mind and the robot. In: Browne AJ (ed) Neural network perspectives on cognition and adaptive robotics. IOP Press, Bristol, pp 169–194

  23. Dourish P (2001) Where the action is: the foundations of embodied interaction. MIT Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  24. Baker JE (1987) Reducing bias and inefficiency in the selection algorithm. In: Proceedings of the second international conference on genetic algorithms and their application. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale

  25. Hornby GS, Lipson H, Pollack JB (2003) Generated representations for the automated design of modular physical robots. IEEE Trans Robot Autom 19(4):703–719

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Sims K (1994) Evolving virtual creatures. In: International conference on computer graphics and interactive techniques

  27. Brooks R (1991) Intelligence without representation. Artif Intell 47:139–151

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported in part by the National Science Foundation under Grant ITR-0326054.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cornell Computational Synthesis Lab, Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

    Eric Schweikardt

  2. Computational Design Lab, School of Architecture, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Mark D. Gross

Authors
  1. Eric Schweikardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mark D. Gross
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric Schweikardt.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schweikardt, E., Gross, M.D. Experiments in design synthesis when behavior is determined by shape. Pers Ubiquit Comput 15, 123–132 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-010-0310-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00779-010-0310-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation