It’s hard to overestimate the impact genetics has had on our understanding of evolution. But one nice example comes from the history of the FOX2P gene and its role in the evolution of language. It’s a nice example because it illustrates both the complexity and utility of genetics. In the popular press FOX2P has been heralded as the ‘language gene’. But this is a simplification, the path from the genome to the person isn’t straightforward and it is influenced by multiple interacting factors (other genes, environmental and developmental processes to name a few). So is FOX2P the ‘language gene’, I’m afraid not, it’s certainly necessary for speech and it has a role to play in our fine motor control but the story behind the evolution of language hasn’t been solved quite yet and there are many, many more factors to consider. So, next time you read about the ‘X’ gene, whether the crime gene or the gay gene, take it with a massive pinch of salt.
“More people have been to Russia than I have””
The above is a syntatic illusion, to most people it seems perfectly fine but in reality it would result in a big minus mark from your English teacher. One of the problems that has been highlighted at this years Evolang conference is that many researchers only consider language that has been written by the editor of the Times. As a result they construct perfect syntax trees, describing the structure of a sentence, and then act surprised when they don’t carry over into reality.
One alternative, proposed by Gary Marcus from New York University, is that we construct mental “treelets” containing limited structural information that is strung together “on the fly” using our inherent associative memory, allowing us to make sense of the language while still being fooled by things like the first sentence.
Well folks for a about a week I’m off to Barcelona to attend Evolang, a conference focused on studying the origins and evolution of language. Whether through fossil records, primate studies or computer simulation the guys here are all working on this fascinating challenge. Bizarrely, they’ve let me come along and I’ll be giving a presentation on this paper, about removing ‘mind-reading’ from the Iterated Learning Model (ILM). The ILM is basically a computer simulation where through conversations between adult and child ‘agents’ we can observe the emergence of a compositional communication system, a key feature of human language. As our ability to string together words to convey complex meanings (compositional) is different from one utterance meaning one thing (like an animal alarm call). Anyway, it promises to be a fascinating event, though I have to admit when I saw this view from the plane, I really wished I’d bought my mountain bike along.
There are sinister goings on in my nondescript research lab, deep within the first floor people are being made to wear funny hats or walk around with water bottles strapped to their back. Why? Well at great personal risk I can reveal that most of my colleagues are involved in biometric research. Specifically, gait analysis and ear biometrics – identification at a distance. Similar to automatic number plate recognition, automatic people recognition is the ultimate goal of this research. Everybody has a unique walking style, a unique face and a unique set of ears, all of these can be picked up by CCTV and used to tag and track your movements. So are my colleagues stripping away our last vestiges of privacy, providing a useful tool for our overstretched security services or will the whole thing turn out to be unworkable outside of the lab. Only time, and a variety of silly hats, will tell.
One of the briefs on my impending Sheffield job is to work on an experimental health and fitness agent, one that is able to discuss your fitness plans and motivate you on a daily basis. Now health and fitness is very important to me, I can usually be found sparring or running with equally insane people at 7am. When I’m not doing this I’ll be competing in triathlons or killing myself on a rock face. Mind you, I’m not any good at these things I just enjoying doing it.
And now I’m a little worried. I’m worried because I think I would be more likely to benefit from one of these:
than one of these:
One is an inspirationally designed but relatively simple robot and the other is a prototype that will require a very advanced dialogue system. The problem is that no matter how advanced the bunny, no matter how detailed the reasoning, at 6am I can just turn it off . By comparison, Clocky demands a response because it’s bloody annoying and if you’re up at 6 you might as well go for a run!
Seriously though, personal trainers and sports clubs work because if you don’t go training they will know about it. The social stigma motivates you to get up. Clocky works because if you don’t stop it it will carry on, remorselessly. Could we ever find ourselves in a situation where we go for a run on a wet December morning because if we don’t an artificial bunny will ‘know’ about it? I’m not sure, but I’m looking forward to finding out.
The parents at @bristol presented a really interesting opinion yesterday. They all seemed to say “So that guy is dressed as a robot that’s cool but now you’re telling me that everyone here is a real live scientist, that’s amazing!” Are we really such a secretive breed that our mere presence is enough to cause excitement. I’m not sure how to react to that, it’s either really depressing: a scientist simply talking to the public should not be a novelty. Or it’s really exciting: people are genuinely interested in who we are and what we do.
Anyway, as my academic carrer continues to roll along I really hope that public engagement with the sciences becomes the norm and not the exception. Walking with Robots is making a really valuable contribution to that ideal and I guess that this blog is a small consequence of that. As you can see from the previous posts Johnathan and Gia have put me through a bit of a blogging masterclass and hopefully I’ll find the time to keep things going. Ideally, I’d like to use this blog to both draw in my academic collegues, by posting my own research and the research that we discuss at Southampton, and to engage with the general public, by blogging about the many, truly amazing, recent scientific developments. The dream would be to get both sides (academic and public) talking to each other in the comment threads. Will I succeed, frankly I have no idea…
After some crucial shoulder protection updates Henry the robot and Dave decided to head back out onto the floor. They soon attracted quite a crowd.
Meanwhile, our other robot was busy doing exactly what it was told to do. With some interesting results…
Henry Marten and David McGoran decided to walk round as a robot today. Challenging people to ask ‘What is a robot?’ and ‘Why is that guy walking around in a cardboard suit?’ Answers to the first question included: ‘Because his legs are showing’ and ‘He has muscles.’ Answers to the second question were mainly ‘Because I can tap him on the shoulder and run away!’ All in all our cardboard robot proved so successful extra researchers were drafted in to answer a barrage of questions. For the second session Henry is planning a few modifications to make it a little more comfortable and, I reckon, giving him a chance to turn round faster.
Xiong Deng set up a presentation on the floor yesterday showing how to use data mining to make predications about the future . It’s a classic human habit, by observing the past we make predictions about the future. In AI we build systems that consider a whole range of factors before making decisions. Using a technique called ‘data mining’ the influential factors of a situation are isolated and measured leading to predictions about everything from the stock market to sporting events – frequently outperforming human experts!Although keeping up a constant flow of information proved challenging, Xiong seemed to be really enjoying himself and the challenge of presenting his work to an entirely different audience.
One of our number at this conference, Nathaniel Poate, is a minor celebrity. His long road into the field of robotics started with an appearance on robot wars. He can be seen here in this youtube video discussing the advantages (a powerful spike) and disadvantages (weak armour) of his robot Short Circuit. After a successful start he was tragically sent to the pit by Hypno Disk. Fortunately, that wasn’t enough to put him off the whole idea and he continues to build robots to this day.
simon's blog 