Robot and Robotics: The Origin and Beyond

Robot and Robotics: The Origin and Beyond Eftychios G. Christoforou1 and Andreas M¨ uller2 1

Dept. of Electrical and Computer Engineering, University of Cyprus, 75 Kallipoleos Ave., 1687 Nicosia, Cyprus [email protected] 2 Institute of Robotics, JKU Johannes Kepler University, Altenbergerstr. 69, 4040 Linz, Austria [email protected]

Abstract. The words “Robot” and “Robotics” originate from the theˇ atrical play “Rossum’s Universal Robots” (R.U.R.) by Karel Capek and the short science fiction story “Runaround” by Isaak Asimov, respectively. While reading these works one realizes that beyond their historical value they also express many ideas that are pertinent to modern robotics and deserve the attention of the robotics community. Keywords: Rossum’s Universal Robots, Runaround, Social Impact of Robots, Roboethics, History of Robotics

1

Introduction

In robotics textbooks it is common that the introduction briefly refers to the origin of the words “Robot” and “ Robotics”, which were introduced in the works ˇ of the Czechoslovak writer Karel Capek and the American (of Russian descent) science fiction writer Isaak Asimov, respectively. Chronologically, the relevant ˇ works of Capek and Asimov were published years before the first industrial robot was created. However, they pose many issues that constitute research topics for contemporary robotics. Some of these issues are identified and discussed in this paper. Quoted italics text represents extracts from the original texts. ˇ One of the most famous works of Karel Capek (1890–1938) is “Rossum’s Universal Robots” (R.U.R.) [13]. It was written and published in 1920 and first staged in Prague in 1921. It is known for the first use of the word “Robot”, which was derived from the archaic Czech word “robota” (drudgery) describing the serf’s obligatory work [6]. To better understand the play one needs to consider the era and the sociological framework that gave birth to R.U.R. At that time Europe was living the consequences of World War I, during which technology was used systematically in warfare. It was also a time of industrialization and introduction of the production line. These developments nourished scepticism towards technology, which was epitomized by the robots in R.U.R.: “Upon my soul we might have known that some day or other the Robots would be stronger than human beings, and that this was bound to happen.” [13, p. 42] Another sociological element that played a role is religion. Culture in the “West” is dominated by elements of Christian and Jewish religious beliefs according to which

life originates from God and any attempt to create life constitutes a “punishable blasphemy”: “All these new–fangled things are an offense to the Lord. It’s downright wickedness. Wanting to improve the world after He has made it.” [13, p. 29] (All quotations of the R.U.R. play in this paper refer to the English translation [13] by Selver and Playfair). A more recent expression of this perception is linked to Honda’s Asimo. Before it was revealed engineers consulted the Catholic church fearing that its opposition to human cloning could probably extend to androids [15]. Interestingly, the response was that “by building a robot, you’re using your imagination to make something useful, not playing God” and that “any robot that helps people, especially the sick or handicapped, would be welcome.” The writings of Asimov (1920–1992) have been a source of inspiration for robotics. In historical notes about robotics it is often quoted that Joseph F. Engelberger was discussing together with George C. Devol about the works of Asimov when they conceived the idea and pursued with the development of the first industrial manipulator, which was first put in service in 1961 in the automotive industry. In his short story “Runaround” Asimov introduced the word “Robotics”. It was written in 1941 and appeared in different published collections [2]. Therein, Asimov also stated the “Fundamental Rules of Robotics”, which are “built most deeply into a robot’s positronic brain”. Note that their weight is hierarchical and the story unfolds around the three laws. Later Asimov himself added a Zeroth Law which was a logical extension to the previous ones. This appeared in the novel “Robots and Empire” that was published in 1985 and it is an extrapolation of the original three laws to a preceding hierarchical level. Law 0: A robot may not injure humanity, or, through inaction, allow humanity to come to harm. Law 1: A robot may not injure a human being, or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm. Law 2: A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First Law. Law 3: A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws.

2 2.1

R.U.R. and the origins of “Robot” Summary of R.U.R.

The story takes place at the island of the factory of Rossum’s Universal Robots, a successful business producing robots, a kind of artificial people. Helena, the president’s daughter, visits the factory and meets Domin, the general manager. Helena is a member of the “Humanity League,” which supports the robots’ rights. Domin explains to Helena the origins and the nature of the robots. It all started with Old Rosuum, an eccentric genius: “His sole purpose was nothing more nor less than to prove that God was no longer necessary.” [13, p. 5] His experimentation with chemical synthesis led to the discovery of a substance which behaved alike living matter (in the year 1932). His efforts remained unconcluded until

the Young Rossum continued following a more practical “engineer’s approach”. With robots employed as labor the prices of goods drop, while at the same time social implications emerge including a rising unemployment. Robots are also used as soldiers. Helena’s visit to the factory leads to her marriage with Domin. The robot population continues to increase while the human population dramatically drops until finally humans are outnumbered by the robots. Ten years later the course of the story changes after some robots had been further developed and acquired a soul! It follows their revolution against humans until they were ready to completely wipe out the human race. Surrounded by menacing robots a last hope for the few remaining humans barricaded in the factory was the possession of “Rossum’s Manuscript”, with the details of robot manufacture that could perhaps be traded with the robots. This last hope vanishes upon finding out that the well–kept secret had already been intentionally destroyed by Helena. It follows the invasion of the robots in the factory and the killing of all but one human. The only human who survived the robots’ menace was Alquist (the builder), because according to the robots he “works with his hands like the robots”. Then the robots become desperate about the continuation of their existence and they put all their hope on Alquist who is proved unable to help them recover Rossum’s formula. Rather unexpectedly, at the conclusion of the story, two Robots begin to express human qualities in their behavior towards one another, appearing ready to assume roles equivalent to Adam and Eve. The curtains fall with a revived hope for the survival of “humanity.” 2.2

R.U.R. and today’s robots

It is interesting that many issues raised in R.U.R. constitute research topics in engineering, social science and philosophy today [5–7]. Some issues pertinent to modern robotics are discussed here. An extensive presentation of these topics can be found in Christoforou and M¨ uller [4]. An interesting element is that R.U.R. robots were produced through a chemical synthesis contrary to today’s robots that are engineered systems. Perhaps this signals that a systematic use of biological sciences in robotics constitutes a direction not yet explored. Of relevance here is the notion of “bioinspired robots” and “biomimetics”. This concept is not about replicating nature as in the Rossums’ case, but rather getting ideas from the nature’s paradigm. Rossum’s intention was to create a human, but today’s research towards humanoid robots is about creating more useful and human–friendlier service robots. Despite the perfect resemblance of R.U.R. robots to humans these were manufactured rather than reproduced which was perceived strangely: “They don’t have any young, and a dog has young, every one has young.” [13, p. 20] A relevant issue often raised in public discussions on robotics concerns the possibility of robots independently manufacturing more robots. Philosophically, this is indeed a most worrying scenario. In R.U.R. this didn’t finally happen since robots never got access to the robot formula. One characteristic of R.U.R. robots is that after production they were ready for work which is also true for today’s robots. As expressed by Pratt [12]: “Human beings take decades to learn enough to add meaningfully to the compendium of

common knowledge. However, robots not only stand on the shoulders of each other’s learning, but can start adding to the compendium of robot knowledge almost immediately after their creation.” Today’s manufacturing businesses are required to use automation in order to maintain a competitive advantage. In the words of R.U.R. business manager: “The cost of labor has fallen. All factories will go pop like chestnuts if they don’t at once buy Robots to lower the cost of production.” [13, p. 15]. However, the result was an increase of unemployment. Idealistically, even though workers were left unemployed, robots would produce so much to lower the prices of goods and eliminate poverty so that everybody would “live only to perfect himself.” The concerns in R.U.R. about robots depriving workers of their job are also echoed in today’s societies. It is a fact, however, that many of the jobs in production undertaken by robots are repetitive and unhealthy. Moreover, increased production output due to robotization requests for more people in downstream activity. The play shows the consequences of an unrestrained use of robots. Today, it is perceived as an appeal for setting up and imposing ethical standards in order to prevent them. Existing regulations regarding the use of robots mainly concern safety issues but efforts towards addressing ethical concerns arising from the use of robots are more recent [14]. Interestingly, isolated references to ethical issues also extend to the “rights of robots” an issue which was also raised in the play through the “Humanity League”. One question that is often posed today regards the use of robots in military applications [1]. This is also expressed in R.U.R.: “...governments turned the Robots into soldiers, and there were so many wars,” “It was criminal of old Europe to teach the Robots to fight. ...It was a crime to make soldiers of them.” [13, p. 23, p. 39] Ethical and social responsibility questions directly concern the involvement of engineers. An attitude of indifference and blindness to morality was also expressed in R.U.R. When Helena was asked the question: “Why do you keep selling thousands and thousands of these heathens as soldiers?” her answer was: “Domin can’t know what they’re to be used for. When an order comes for them he must just send them.” [13, p. 24]. The R.U.R. robots have a close resemblance to humans in terms of appearance and behavior: “You wouldn’t know that she’s made of different material from us, would you?” [13, p. 8] There exist both male and female R.U.R. robots but this is irrelevant to reproduction. It has to do with human friendliness and acceptance, i.e., it would be perceived more natural for humans if jobs traditionally performed by men/women were assigned to a robot/robotess, respectively: “There’s a certain demand for them, you see. Servants, saleswomen, stenographers. People are used to it.” [13, p. 17] The physical appearance of robots is often directly attributed to human friendliness and deemed beneficial for human– robot interaction as required by service robots. However, it is difficult to cross the “uncanny valley” [9]. A current trend that also exists is to make service robots appear clearly as a technical system a user has control of. But in different cultures there are different attitudes towards human likeness. Technological issues are also raised in R.U.R. Methodologically, we see that two different approaches were followed by the two Rossums towards creating the

robots. Old Rossum was a physiologist and he tried to “manufacture everything as in the human body,” “The old crank wanted to actually make people.” [13, p. 5] Young Rossum pursued a more practical, engineer’s approach upon realizing that Old Rossum’s process had been a rather long one: “It’s absurd to spend ten years making a man. If you can’t make him quicker than nature, you might as well shut up shop.” [13, p. 5] He identified what could be omitted or simplified from the human anatomy given that a human does many things that are unnecessary for a good working machine. Young Rossum effectively “he rejected man and made the Robot.” [13, p. 6] In analogy, today’s robots are engineered systems where complexity adding little value to the system is usually discarded. Robots are tireless workers as implied by their given name. Their effectiveness was advocated by the factory management: “- One Robot can replace two and a half workmen. The human machine, Miss Glory, was terribly imperfect. It had to be removed sooner or later. - It was too expensive. - It was not effective. It no longer answers the requirements of modern engineering.” [13, p. 13] An idea expressed for the further development of the R.U.R. robots was to build “pain–nerves” as “an automatic protection against damage.” [13, p. 14] It was proposed in order to protect the robot’s existence and well–being, as in the case of humans or animals. For an engineered robot of today introducing suffering sounds an interesting but also absurd idea since the same result can be achieved simply as a programmed reaction of the system to sensory input. The possession of a soul and consciousness is seen as the dividing line between humans and robots but conflicting views exist relevant to this issue [10, 11, 8]. When Helena posed the question “- Why don’t you create a soul for them? ” she received three answers from the factory directors [13, p. 15]: “- That’s not on our power. - That’s not in our interest. - That would increase the cost of production.” It was after the acquisition of a soul that the robots’ mental potency was augmented and their rebelion was ignited. From that point on robots appeared with deeper consciousness, emotions and initiative. Among their emotions was hostility and ambition: “I want to be master over people.” [13, p. 27], but also anxiety regarding the continuation of their “species”: “Teach us to multiply or we perish!” [13, p. 53] At the epilogue of the story robots exhibited a wider range of emotions (empathy, altruism, etc.) which signified a transformation towards humans. In [3] it is explained that from a Buddhist perspective empathy is a key aspect of interaction between humans which will be important in human–robot relations. Today, anthropomorphic robots are probably perceived as the technological product most close to humans and this realization is important for service robotics. Towards the end of the story an element that emerges is the notion of duality between human and robot, a most vivid expression of which comes from Alquist when he desperately tries to recover the reproduction formula. He prays to God to help the robots: “Lord - I pray to you - if there are no human beings left, at least let there be Robots! - At least the shadow of man!” [13, p. 51]

3 3.1

Runaround and the origins of “Robotics” Summary of Runaround

In the year 2015 Powel and Donovan arrive to Mercury to restart operations at a mining station which had been abandoned ten years before. They were accompanied by “Speedy”, a technologically advanced robot. Upon arrival they realize that the photocells that were vital for the operation of the station and the occupants’ survival were short of Selenium and they were close to fail. The conditions outside the station were not suitable for humans and Speedy was sent to the nearest selenium pool to bring selenium. When Speedy was late to return the two men were anxious about finding selenium but also how to recover Speedy. Using the antiquated equipment available from the previous expedition they managed to track Speedy’s position who had been circling the pool. Their first idea was to use the old robots from the previous expedition, which were less developed “subrobotic” machines with primitive “positronic” brain. They were oversized and could not operate autonomously; only with a rider on their shoulders. Wearing their special “insosuits” (suits designed to withstand extreme heat) the two men used the old robots to approach Speedy’s location. Speedy was not responsive to their instructions (as one would expect on the basis of Law 2) while behaving strangely - something perceived as a robotic equivalence of drunkenness. Puzzled about the robot’s behavior they started reasoning based on the Three Laws of Robotics and the corresponding “positronic potentials” in the robot’s brain until they identified the source of the problem: Speedy was a highly developed and expensive robot and for this reason Law 3 was strengthened in order to better protect it. As a result, Law 2 was setting up a potential driving the robot towards the selenium pool. Upon approaching to the danger a counterpotential was emerging from Law 3 driving the robot backwards until a potential equilibrium is obtained. Speedy was then moving on the locus of points of potential equilibrium resulting to a “runaround”. Their next idea was to increase the potential of Law 3 by multiplying the danger at the pool which would drive Speedy backwards and allow them to capture him. To implement this idea they used the old robots to throw oxalic acid at the pool, which on heating produces more carbon monoxide. Speedy’s motion was then disturbed until finally settled to a new equilibrium by opening up the path; but recovering him was not successful. Within their desperation they thought about Law 1 and decided that one of them should risk his life by approaching the pool to get the selenium, hoping that Speedy will realize the situation and come to rescue. Powel who attempted this finally found himself in a dramatic situation while Speedy would not intervene. It was only until Powel was fully exhausted when Speedy became aware of the situation, came to his rescue and both returned to the station. After the hierarchy of the Laws was restored in Speedy’s brain the robot was sent again to bring the selenium. Following this development the operation of the station was ready to begin.

3.2

Runaround and today’s robotics

It is interesting that Runaround had foreseen many issues regarding robotics. In the story, Speedy participates in a space operation. This application for robotics was in fact considered a few years after the story was published, during the Cold War era for the exploration of the moon and more recently with the rovers for the exploration of Mars. Speedy was sent to the selenium pool for a task that humans were unable to do because of the environmental conditions. Today’s analogy is that modern robotics undertake operations that are difficult or dangerous for humans, such as fire fighting and explosives disposal. In the case of Speedy it was mentioned: “You know he’s perfectly adapted to a Mercurian environment. Heat doesn’t mean anything to him and he’s built for the light gravity and the broken ground. He’s foolproof.” There exist other descriptions in Runaround that also applied to robotics a few decades after its publication. The developments in robotic technology have been tremendous. As also described in the story: “Even ten years, technologically speaking, meant so much. Compare Speedy with the type of robot they must have had back in 2005.”, “You mean six robots from the First Expedition. Are you sure? They may be subrobotic machines. Ten years is a long time as far as robot-types are concerned, you know.” Another difference between Speedy and the robots from the first expedition was their physical size: “They were large, extremely so, and even though they were in a sitting position on the floor, legs straddled out before them, their heads were a good seven feet in the air.” Speedy was also faster when compared to the older models. The same applies to modern– times robotics. Consider for example industrial robots of the 60’s or 70’s and the latest models of today. Clearly, the former were bulkier and slow–moving. The introduction of robots is sometimes confronted with skepticism and this particularly applies to service robotics. Some people may even feel threatened by robots and afraid that one day robots can take control and destroy humanity (as in the R.U.R. scenario). In the story, after the old–model robot responded to the orders with a “Yes, Master!”, Powell commented humorously at Donovan: “Did you get that? Those were the days of the first talking robots when it looked as if the use of robots on Earth would be banned. The makers were fighting that and they built good, healthy slave complexes into the damned machines.” Speedy was a modern robot characterized by autonomy but the robots from the first expedition would require a rider in order to move. A drive towards more autonomy is a characteristic of modern robotics. Originally, robotics was dealing with well–defined problems and structured environments. Nowadays, robotics is increasingly confronted with ill–defined and unstructured problems. Today, safety has become a key issue. The approach to safety for the old generation robots in the station was to eliminate autonomy: “We’ve got to ride him? Like a horse?”, ”I told you they were playing up robot–safety in those days. Evidently, they were going to sell the notion of safety by not allowing them to move about, without a mahout on their shoulders all the time.”

4

Concluding remarks

Both R.U.R. and Runaround deserve the attention of roboticists primarily because of their historical value but also because they express ideas that are pertinent to our times. It is both interesting and stimulating to (re)consider R.U.R. and Runaround, as it is for robots in science fiction in general. It is inevitable that the use of robots will expand and in the future people will be living and working alongside robots. Today, it is considered unlikely that robots will revolt against humans, as in the case of R.U.R. However, R.U.R. may be seen as a call for regulation to prevent any unwanted consequences from a large–scale use of robotics. At the core of the Runaround story have been the Three Laws of Robotics. Admittedly, Asimov’s Laws have not been at the epicenter of Robotics but they may be perceived as an ethical foundation for the field. It is interesting that the above two works that named our scientific field have left us as a legacy the obligation for an ethical foundation which today we refer to as “Roboethics.”

References 1. Arkin, R.: Governing lethal behavior in autonomous robots. CRC Press (2009) 2. Asimov, I.: The complete robot. Voyager, London (1982) 3. Barua, R., Sraman, S., Heerink, M.: Empathy, compassion and social robots: an approach from Buddhist philosophy. In: Proc. New Friends 2015 - 1st Int. Conference on Social Robots in Therapy and Education. Almere, The Netherlands (2015) 4. Christoforou, E., M¨ uller, A.: R.U.R. revisited: Perspectives and reflections on modern robotics. International Journal of Social Robotics 8(2), 237–246 (2016) 5. Hoffmann, M., Brom, C.: Agents vs. Rossum’s robots: Towards intelligent living machines. In: Proc. 1st Czech - Argentine Biennale Workshop “e - Golems”. pp. 87–96. Prague, Czech Republic (2005) 6. Hor´ akov´ a, J., Kelemen, J.: Artificial living beings and robots: one root, variety of influences. Artificial Life and Robotics 13, 555–560 (2009) ˇ 7. Hor´ akov´ a, J., Kelemen, J.: Some impacts of Karel Capek’s concept of robots as artificial organisms. In: Proc. of 4th International Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering & Technology. pp. 49–54. Port Louis, Mauritius (2011) 8. Metzler, T.: Viewing assignment of moral status to service robots from the theological ethics of Paul Tillich: some hard questions. Tech. Rep. WS-07-07 15–20, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, California (2007) 9. Mori, M.: The Uncanny Valley. Energy 7(4), 33–35 (1970) 10. Mori, M.: The Buddha in the robot. Kosei Publishing Co., Tokyo (2005) 11. Pope, L., Metzler, T.: Has a robotic dog the Buddha-nature? Mu! Tech. Rep. WS08-05 23–26, AAAI Press, Menlo Park, California (2008) 12. Pratt, G.: Is a Cambrian Explosion Coming for Robotics? Journal of Economic Perspectives 29(3), 51–60 (2015) ˇ 13. Capek, K.: Rossum’s Universal Robots. Dover Publications Inc., Mineola, New York (2001) 14. Veruggio, G., Operto, F.: Roboethics: social and ethical implications of robotics. In: Siciliano B, Khatib O (Eds) Handbook of Robotics. Springer Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg (2008) 15. Zaun, T.: Why did Honda build a humanoid robot that meets with the Vatican’s approval? Wall Street Journal Sept. 4 (2001)