Kenneth Rinaldo
Autopoiesis is an artificial life robotic series. It consists of fifteen musical and robotic sculptures that interact with the public and modify their behaviors based on the both the presences of the participants in the exhibition and the communication between each separate sculpture. Autopoiesis is "self making", a characteristic of all living systems. This characteristic of living systems was defined and refined by Francisco Varela and Humberto Maturana. The structures themselves are constructed of cabernet sauvignon grapevines pulled into compression with steel wires. The joints are a custom molded urethane plastic, which is all, tied together using cyanoacrylate and baking soda. The grapevines were selected to create an approachable natural sculpture that exists in the human biological realm.
This series of robotic sculptures talk with each other through a hardwired network and audible telephone tones, which are a musical language for the group. Autopoiesis breaks out of standard interfaces (mouse) and playback methodologies (CRT) and presents an interactive environment, which is immersive, detailed and able to evolve in real time by utilizing feedback and interaction from audience/participant members. The interactivity engages the viewer/participant who in turn effects the system's evolution and emergence. This creates a system evolution as well as an overall group sculptural aesthetic.
Autopoiesis utilizes a number of unique approaches to create this complex and evolving environment. It uses smart sensor organization that senses the presence of the viewer/participant and allows the robotic sculpture to respond intelligently. I have used smart sensor organization in past papers to describe the process of organizing the sensors in such a way that they can be minimized in number while maximizing the abilities of the software to cope with the data. This idea was also explored at the Fourth Neuromorphic Engineering workshop at the Telluride Summer Research Center where participants noted that just a few sensors can be used to create complex interaction if the sensors are properly organized.
For example, at the top of each sculptural element (or arm) four passive infrared sensors face North, South, East and west. When two sensors are triggered, the program knows that someone is located in, for instance, the Southeast corner and this is the direction the sculpture moves to. Four sensors allow eight quadrants of sensing. These passive infrared sensors tell each arm to move in the direction of the viewer, while the active infrared sensor located at the tip stops the arm as it arrives within inches of the viewer. This allows the sculpture to display both attraction and repulsion behaviors.
Furthermore, in Autopoiesis the robotic sensors compare their sensor data through a central-state controller, so the viewer is able to walk through the sculptural installation and have the arms interact both individually and as a group. Because each arm has its own on-board custom built RISC PIC computer control, the overall speed of reaction is rapid and therefore, life-like. Local control always supercedes group control when a local sensor is aware of a human nearby. The software programmed in c and the hardware are structured with the subsumption architecture defined by Rodney Brooks in which the intelligence of the system is distributed to the farthest reaches of the system. For example each infrared sensor both active and passive are in essence minicomputers that provide only the data necessary to the local computer on each arm and to the global computer that connects all the arms. Each arms local computer handles only local interaction and the speed of the RISC controllers is rapid and over designed to allow individual arms to show accuracy and delicacy of approach and avoidance when encountering the viewer/participant.
At the tip of two of the arms, lipstick cameras project what they see onto the walls of the space. This gives the viewer/participant a sense of being observed by this artificial life robotic sculpture.
The sculptures communicate using bit strings as they exchange this data serially via a 485 network, which interconnects all the sculptures to a central state TERN control board. Each sculpture also generates bit strings of information which are funneled into the central state controller and the number of participants in the exhibition gives this controller "a feel" for the global environment.
If the global controller gets many sensor hits then the group behavior is less vigorous and more tentative, while if the global controller get less hits over time then the arms behaviors become more vigorous and large group behaviors are expressed. An internal numerical randomizer keeps the behaviors evolving and changing over time in response to these factors. These randomizers effect overall sculptural form and the evolution of the sound environment as well. Some of the behaviors you will notice in the video are "follow the leader" where one arm is passing a "mimic me" message to the next arm etc. Or flocking behavior where they are all moving simultaneously, or flock out from the center where the arm in the center sends a message for the other arms to follow.
The telephone tones are a musical language that allows individual robotic sculptures to communicate and give the viewer a sense of the emotional state of the sculptural elements as they interact Higher and more rapid tones are associated with fear and the lower, more deliberate tonal sequences with relaxation and play. Other tones give the impression of the sculptures whistling to themselves. The telephone tones are a consistent language of intercommunication and manifest a sense of overall robotic group consciousness, where what is said by one, effects what is said by others.
Autopoiesis continually evolves its own behaviors in response to the unique environment and viewer/participant inputs. This group consciousness of sculptural robots manifests a cybernetic ballet of experience, with the computer/machine and viewer/participant involved in a grand dance of one sensing and responding to the other.
Special Thanks to:
Amy Youngs, Dan Shellenbarger, Jesse Hemminger, Jenny Macy, Chris Gose, John Morrow , The Department of Art, and The Kiasma Museum of Contemporary Art for their assistance and financial support in realizing this project.
|