"We introduce a system in which a humanoid robot executes commands before it actually receives them, so that the visual feedback appears to be synchronized to the operator, whereas the robot executed the commands in the past. To do so, the robot continuously predicts future commands by querying a machine learning model that is trained on past trajectories and conditioned on the last received commands. In our experiments, an operator was able to successfully control a humanoid robot (32 degrees of freedom) with stochastic delays up to 2 seconds in several whole-body manipulation tasks, including reaching different targets, picking up, and placing a box at distinct locations."
we are also happy with waf, wich gives us a lot of flexibility (e.g., use python libs that are not build-related) and use a language that the team already know.
(https://waf.io)
Gaussian Processes are very good when you do not have much data (< 500 points) and and your data are low-dimensional (<10 dimensions). For this, they are more accurate than anything else, and they provide both a prediction and variance.
Most journals are OK with authors posting a paper on their own website, especially the 'pre-print' (pre-review, pre-layout). See: http://www.sherpa.ac.uk/romeo/index.php
(even Nature is OK for all the pre-prints, arxiv and your own website).
My definition: there is no clear limit, but there is a spectrum of ‘roboticity’ that corresponds to the spectrum of ‘versatility’. The more versatile a machine is, the more a robot it is.
For instance, a blender is not versatile. But a cooking robot can do more things (it blends, but also cooks, mixes, etc.). This is why the cooking robot is more a robot than a blender.
This is similar in industry. You have specialized machines, which can do a single thing. Industrial robots are more versatile because we can program them to achieve different task (e.g. when there is a new model of car). The ultimate robot would be as versatile as a human. This kind of humanoid would have the highest level of ‘roboticity’.
... or more than 100 top French researchers for 3 years (Research Director, top pay at the end of the career is about 6000 euros / ~10000 for the company).
The actual rule for European grant (H2020) is "either publish in open-access or put the paper on arxiv or similar archives". We can still publish in non-open access journals provided that we put the paper on an open access repository.
In H2020 projects (EU projects), the maximum embargo that can be "tolerated" is 6 months (then it has to be on arxiv) [12 months for social sciences]. However, all journals are OK with an arxiv post of the submitted (pre-review) manuscript, and this is what every authors should do.
Nature (and the vast majory of journals) is OK with posting on arxiv the pre-review manuscript, but not the post-review (ie, with the changes made after the comments by the reviewers) and not the version they edited (and added their page layout).
Some journals allow us to post the post-review paper (at any rate, the changes are usually mostly cosmetic).
Most of the robots in the manufacturing industry are following a pre-set sequence. Why do we call them a robot whereas most people would not call a dishwasher a robot?
I think what we (as a society) call a robot is a machine that has some degree of versatility:
- an industrial robot can be programmed to achieve a different task (even if the sequence is pre-set, it is easy to set a different sequence for a different need), and the same kind of robots can be used to achieve many different tasks
- a food processor can make many different recipes
- a Roomba can adapt its behavior to the room (it has some degree of versatility because it can adapt to the conditions)
... but a dishwasher has a single purpose, which is why we usually do not call it a robot (even if it has sensors, actuators, some algorithms, etc.). If the dishwasher was also capable of cooking dishes, it would be more versatile and we would call this a robot (think of a humanoid torso that could do the dishes but also cook your eggs).
And the most versatile robots like a fully-featured humanoid is probably what we all have in mind when talk about robots.
Overall, we could say that we have degrees of versatility and therefore degrees of 'roboticity'. The lower level is the dishwasher, the highest level is the humanoid.
A bit like linguee but for scientists: (at the bottom of the page): https://www.linguee.fr/francais-anglais/search?source=auto&q...