A dynamic Bayesian network (DBN) is a Bayesian network (BN) which relates variables to each other over adjacent time steps. == History == A dynamic Bayesian network (DBN) is often called a "two-timeslice" BN (2TBN) because it says that at any point in time T, the value of a variable can be calculated from the internal regressors and the immediate prior value (time T-1). DBNs were developed by Paul Dagum in the early 1990s at Stanford University's Section on Medical Informatics. Dagum developed DBNs to unify and extend traditional linear state-space models such as Kalman filters, linear and normal forecasting models such as ARMA and simple dependency models such as hidden Markov models into a general probabilistic representation and inference mechanism for arbitrary nonlinear and non-normal time-dependent domains. Today, DBNs are common in robotics, and have shown potential for a wide range of data mining applications. For example, they have been used in speech recognition, digital forensics, protein sequencing, and bioinformatics. DBN is a generalization of hidden Markov models and Kalman filters. DBNs are conceptually related to probabilistic Boolean networks and can, similarly, be used to model dynamical systems at steady-state.
Optical sorting
Optical sorting (sometimes called digital sorting) is the automated process of sorting solid products using cameras and/or lasers. Depending on the types of sensors used and the software-driven intelligence of the image processing system, optical sorters can recognize an object's color, size, shape, structural properties and chemical composition. The sorter compares objects to user-defined accept/reject criteria to identify and remove defective products and foreign material (FM) from the production line, or to separate product of different grades or types of materials. Optical sorters are in widespread use in the food industry worldwide, with the highest adoption in processing harvested foods such as potatoes, fruits, vegetables and nuts where it achieves non-destructive, 100 percent inspection in-line at full production volumes. The technology is also used in pharmaceutical manufacturing and nutraceutical manufacturing, tobacco processing, waste recycling and other industries. Compared to manual sorting, which is subjective and inconsistent, optical sorting helps improve product quality, maximize throughput and increase yields while reducing labor costs. == History == Optical sorting is an idea that first came out of the desire to automate industrial sorting of agricultural goods like fruits and vegetables. Before automated optical sorting technology was conceived in the 1930s, companies like Unitec were producing wooden machinery to assist in the mechanical sorting of fruit processing. In 1931, a company known as “the Electric Sorting Company” was incorporated and began the creation of the world’s first color sorters, which were being installed and used in Michigan’s bean industry by 1932. In 1937, optical sorting technology had advanced to allow for systems based on a two-color principle of selection. The next few decades saw the installation of new and improved sorting mechanisms, like gravity feed systems and the implementation of optical sorting in more agricultural industries. In the late 1960s, optical sorting began to be implemented to new industries beyond agriculture, like the sorting of ferrous and non-ferrous metals. By the 1990s, optical sorting was being used heavily in the sorting of solid wastes. With the large technological revolution happening in the late 1990s and early 2000s, optical sorters were being made more efficient via the implementation of new optical sensors, like CCD, UV, and IR cameras. Today, optical sorting is used in a wide variety of industries and, as such, is implemented with a varying selection of mechanisms to assist in that specific sorter’s task. == The sorting system == In general, optical sorters feature four major components: the feed system, the optical system, image processing software, and the separation system. The objective of the feed system is to spread products into a uniform monolayer so products are presented to the optical system evenly, without clumps, at a constant velocity. The optical system includes lights and sensors housed above and/or below the flow of the objects being inspected. The image processing system compares objects to user-defined accept/reject thresholds to classify objects and actuate the separation system. The separation system — usually compressed air for small products and mechanical devices for larger products, like whole potatoes — pinpoints objects while in-air and deflects the objects to remove into a reject chute while the good product continues along its normal trajectory. The ideal sorter to use depends on the application. Therefore, the product's characteristics and the user's objectives determine the ideal sensors, software-driven capabilities and mechanical platform. == Sensors == Optical sorters require a combination of lights and sensors to illuminate and capture images of the objects so the images can be processed. The processed images will determine if the material should be accepted or rejected. There are camera sorters, laser sorters and sorters that feature a combination of the two on one platform. Lights, cameras, lasers and laser sensors can be designed to function within visible light wavelengths as well as the infrared (IR) and ultraviolet (UV) spectrums. The optimal wavelengths for each application maximize the contrast between the objects to be separated. Cameras and laser sensors can differ in spatial resolution, with higher resolutions enabling the sorter to detect and remove smaller defects. === Cameras === Monochromatic cameras detect shades of gray from black to white and can be effective when sorting products with high-contrast defects. Sophisticated color cameras with high color resolution are capable of detecting millions of colors to better distinguish more subtle color defects. Trichromatic color cameras (also called three-channel cameras) divide light into three bands, which can include red, green and/or blue within the visible spectrum as well as IR and UV. The interaction of different materials with parts of the electromagnetic spectrum make these contrasts more evident than how they appear to the naked human eye. Coupled with intelligent software, sorters that feature cameras are capable of recognizing each object's color, size and shape; as well as the color, size, shape and location of a defect on a product. Some intelligent sorters even allow the user to define a defective product based on the total defective surface area of any given object. === Lasers === While cameras capture product information based primarily on material reflectance, lasers and their sensors are able to distinguish a material's structural properties along with their color. This structural property inspection allows lasers to detect a wide range of organic and inorganic foreign material such as insects, glass, metal, sticks, rocks and plastic; even if they are the same color as the good product. Lasers can be designed to operate within specific wavelengths of light; whether on the visible spectrum or beyond. For example, lasers can detect chlorophyll by stimulating fluorescence using specific wavelengths; which is a process that is very effective for removing foreign material from green vegetables. === Camera/laser combinations === Sorters equipped with cameras and lasers on one platform are generally capable of identifying the widest variety of attributes. Cameras are often better at recognizing color, size and shape while laser sensors identify differences in structural properties to maximize foreign material detection and removal. === Hyperspectral Imaging === Driven by the need to solve previously impossible sorting challenges, a new generation of sorters that feature multispectral and hyperspectral imaging Optical Sorters. Like trichromatic cameras, multispectral and hyperspectral cameras collect data from the electromagnetic spectrum. Unlike trichromatic cameras, which divide light into three bands, hyperspectral systems can divide light into hundreds of narrow bands over a continuous range that covers a vast portion of the electromagnetic spectrum. This opens the door for more detailed analysis that leads to a more consistent product. Using IR alone might detect some defects, but combining it with a broader range of the spectrum makes it more effective. Compared to the three data points per pixel collected by trichromatic cameras, hyperspectral cameras can collect hundreds of data points per pixel, which are combined to create a unique spectral signature (also called a fingerprint) for each object. When complemented by capable software intelligence, a hyperspectral sorter processes those fingerprints to enable sorting on the chemical composition of the product. This is an emerging area of chemometrics. == Software-driven intelligence == Once the sensors capture the object's response to the energy source, image processing is used to manipulate the raw data. The image processing extracts and categorizes information about specific features. The user then defines accept/reject thresholds that are used to determine what is good and bad in the raw data flow. The art and science of image processing lies in developing algorithms that maximize the effectiveness of the sorter while presenting a simple user-interface to the operator. Object-based recognition is a classic example of software-driven intelligence. It allows the user to define a defective product based on where a defect lies on the product and/or the total defective surface area of an object. It offers more control in defining a wider range of defective products. When used to control the sorter's ejection system, it can improve the accuracy of ejecting defective products. This improves product quality and increases yields. New software-driven capabilities are constantly being developed to address the specific needs of various applications. As computing hardware becomes more powerful, new software-driven advancements become possible. Some of these advancements enhance the effectivene
AlphaGo Zero
AlphaGo Zero is a version of DeepMind's Go software AlphaGo. AlphaGo's team published an article in Nature in October 2017 introducing AlphaGo Zero, a version created without using data from human games, and stronger than any previous version. By playing games against itself, AlphaGo Zero: surpassed the strength of AlphaGo Lee in three days by winning 100 games to 0; reached the level of AlphaGo Master in 21 days; and exceeded all previous versions in 40 days. Training artificial intelligence (AI) without datasets derived from human experts has significant implications for the development of AI with superhuman skills, as expert data is "often expensive, unreliable, or simply unavailable." Demis Hassabis, the co-founder and CEO of DeepMind, said that AlphaGo Zero was so powerful because it was "no longer constrained by the limits of human knowledge". Furthermore, AlphaGo Zero performed better than standard deep reinforcement learning models (such as Deep Q-Network implementations) due to its integration of Monte Carlo tree search. David Silver, one of the first authors of DeepMind's papers published in Nature on AlphaGo, said that it is possible to have generalized AI algorithms by removing the need to learn from humans. Google later developed AlphaZero, a generalized version of AlphaGo Zero that could play chess and shōgi in addition to Go. In December 2017, AlphaZero beat the 3-day version of AlphaGo Zero by winning 60 games to 40, and with 8 hours of training it outperformed AlphaGo Lee on an Elo scale. AlphaZero also defeated a top chess program (Stockfish) and a top Shōgi program (Elmo). == Architecture == The network in AlphaGo Zero is a ResNet with two heads. The stem of the network takes as input a 17x19x19 tensor representation of the Go board. 8 channels are the positions of the current player's stones from the last eight time steps. (1 if there is a stone, 0 otherwise. If the time step go before the beginning of the game, then 0 in all positions.) 8 channels are the positions of the other player's stones from the last eight time steps. 1 channel is all 1 if black is to move, and 0 otherwise. The body is a ResNet with either 20 or 40 residual blocks and 256 channels. There are two heads, a policy head and a value head. Policy head outputs a logit array of size 19 × 19 + 1 {\displaystyle 19\times 19+1} , representing the logit of making a move in one of the points, plus the logit of passing. Value head outputs a number in the range ( − 1 , + 1 ) {\displaystyle (-1,+1)} , representing the expected score for the current player. -1 represents current player losing, and +1 winning. == Training == AlphaGo Zero's neural network was trained using TensorFlow, with 64 GPU workers and 19 CPU parameter servers. Only four TPUs were used for inference. The neural network initially knew nothing about Go beyond the rules. Unlike earlier versions of AlphaGo, Zero only perceived the board's stones, rather than having some rare human-programmed edge cases to help recognize unusual Go board positions. The AI engaged in reinforcement learning, playing against itself until it could anticipate its own moves and how those moves would affect the game's outcome. In the first three days AlphaGo Zero played 4.9 million games against itself in quick succession. It appeared to develop the skills required to beat top humans within just a few days, whereas the earlier AlphaGo took months of training to achieve the same level. According to Epoch.ai, training cost 3e23 FLOPs. For comparison, the researchers also trained a version of AlphaGo Zero using human games, AlphaGo Master, and found that it learned more quickly, but actually performed more poorly in the long run. DeepMind submitted its initial findings in a paper to Nature in April 2017, which was then published in October 2017. == Hardware cost == The hardware cost for a single AlphaGo Zero system in 2017, including the four TPUs, has been quoted as around $25 million. == Applications == According to Hassabis, AlphaGo's algorithms are likely to be of the most benefit to domains that require an intelligent search through an enormous space of possibilities, such as protein folding (see AlphaFold) or accurately simulating chemical reactions. AlphaGo's techniques are probably less useful in domains that are difficult to simulate, such as learning how to drive a car. DeepMind stated in October 2017 that it had already started active work on attempting to use AlphaGo Zero technology for protein folding, and stated it would soon publish new findings. == Reception == AlphaGo Zero was widely regarded as a significant advance, even when compared with its groundbreaking predecessor, AlphaGo. Oren Etzioni of the Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence called AlphaGo Zero "a very impressive technical result" in "both their ability to do it—and their ability to train the system in 40 days, on four TPUs". The Guardian called it a "major breakthrough for artificial intelligence", citing Eleni Vasilaki of Sheffield University and Tom Mitchell of Carnegie Mellon University, who called it an impressive feat and an “outstanding engineering accomplishment" respectively. Mark Pesce of the University of Sydney called AlphaGo Zero "a big technological advance" taking us into "undiscovered territory". Gary Marcus, a psychologist at New York University, has cautioned that for all we know, AlphaGo may contain "implicit knowledge that the programmers have about how to construct machines to play problems like Go" and will need to be tested in other domains before being sure that its base architecture is effective at much more than playing Go. In contrast, DeepMind is "confident that this approach is generalisable to a large number of domains". In response to the reports, South Korean Go professional Lee Sedol said, "The previous version of AlphaGo wasn’t perfect, and I believe that’s why AlphaGo Zero was made." On the potential for AlphaGo's development, Lee said he will have to wait and see but also said it will affect young Go players. Mok Jin-seok, who directs the South Korean national Go team, said the Go world has already been imitating the playing styles of previous versions of AlphaGo and creating new ideas from them, and he is hopeful that new ideas will come out from AlphaGo Zero. Mok also added that general trends in the Go world are now being influenced by AlphaGo's playing style. "At first, it was hard to understand and I almost felt like I was playing against an alien. However, having had a great amount of experience, I’ve become used to it," Mok said. "We are now past the point where we debate the gap between the capability of AlphaGo and humans. It’s now between computers." Mok has reportedly already begun analyzing the playing style of AlphaGo Zero along with players from the national team. "Though having watched only a few matches, we received the impression that AlphaGo Zero plays more like a human than its predecessors," Mok said. Chinese Go professional Ke Jie commented on the remarkable accomplishments of the new program: "A pure self-learning AlphaGo is the strongest. Humans seem redundant in front of its self-improvement." == Comparison with predecessors == == AlphaZero == On 5 December 2017, DeepMind team released a preprint on arXiv, introducing AlphaZero, a program using generalized AlphaGo Zero's approach, which achieved within 24 hours a superhuman level of play in chess, shogi, and Go, defeating world-champion programs, Stockfish, Elmo, and 3-day version of AlphaGo Zero in each case. AlphaZero (AZ) is a more generalized variant of the AlphaGo Zero (AGZ) algorithm, and is able to play shogi and chess as well as Go. Differences between AZ and AGZ include: AZ has hard-coded rules for setting search hyperparameters. The neural network is now updated continually. Chess (unlike Go) can end in a tie; therefore AZ can take into account the possibility of a tie game. An open source program, Leela Zero, based on the ideas from the AlphaGo papers is available. It uses a GPU instead of the TPUs recent versions of AlphaGo rely on.
METR
Model Evaluation and Threat Research (METR) (MEE-tər), is a nonprofit research institute, based in Berkeley, California, that evaluates frontier AI models' capabilities to carry out long-horizon, agentic tasks that some researchers argue could pose catastrophic risks to society. METR has worked with leading AI companies to conduct pre-deployment model evaluations and contribute to system cards, including OpenAI's o3, o4-mini, GPT-4o and GPT-4.5, and Anthropic's Claude models. METR's CEO and founder is Beth Barnes, a former alignment researcher at OpenAI who left in 2022 to form ARC Evals, the evaluation division of Paul Christiano's Alignment Research Center. In December 2023, ARC Evals was spun off into an independent 501(c)(3) nonprofit and renamed METR. == Research == A substantial amount of METR's research is focused on evaluating the capabilities of AI systems to conduct research and development of AI systems themselves, including RE-Bench, a benchmark designed to test whether AIs can "solve research engineering tasks and accelerate AI R&D". === Doubling time estimates === In March 2025, METR published a paper noting that the length of software engineering tasks that the leading AI model could complete had a doubling time of around 7 months between 2019 and 2024. In January 2026, METR released a new version of their time horizon estimates model (Time Horizon 1.1). According to the updated model, the rate of progress of AI capabilities has increased since 2023, with a post-2023 doubling time estimated at 130.8 days (4.3 months). Progress is thus estimated to be 20% more rapid. === Time horizon measurements === METR releases a "task-completion time horizon" for analysed AI models. This measures the "task duration (measured by human expert completion time) at which an AI agent is predicted to succeed with a given level of reliability." The metric is reported in two variants: the 50%-time horizon, which gives the task duration at which an AI model is estimated to succeed 50% of the time, and the 80%-time horizon, which gives the task duration at which an AI model is estimated to succeed 80% of the time. METR has published two versions of the underlying model: Time Horizon 1.0 and Time Horizon 1.1, the latter introduced in January 2026. As of 9 May 2026, the best-performing model is Claude Mythos, with a 50%-time horizon of likely at least 16 hours and an 80%-time horizon of 3 hours and 6 minutes. METR notes that "[m]easurements above 16 [hours] are unreliable with [their] current task suite". The following table provides time horizon estimates ordered by each model's release date:
Learning Applied to Ground Vehicles
The Learning Applied to Ground Vehicles (LAGR) program, which ran from 2004 until 2008, had the goal of accelerating progress in autonomous, perception-based, off-road navigation in robotic unmanned ground vehicles (UGVs). LAGR was funded by DARPA, a research agency of the United States Department of Defense. == History and background == While mobile robots had been in existence since the 1960s, (e.g. Shakey), progress in creating robots that could navigate on their own, outdoors, off-road, on irregular, obstacle-rich terrain had been slow. In fact, no clear metrics were in place to measure progress. A baseline understanding of off-road capabilities began to emerge with the DARPA PerceptOR program in which independent research teams fielded robotic vehicles in unrehearsed Government tests that measured average speed and number of required operator interventions over a fixed course over widely spaced waypoints. These tests exposed the extreme challenges of off-road navigation. While the PerceptOR vehicles were equipped with sensors and algorithms that were state-of-the-art for the beginning of the 21st century, the limited range of their perception technology caused them to become trapped in natural cul-de-sacs. Furthermore, their reliance on pre-scripted behaviors did not allow them to adapt to unexpected circumstances. The overall result was that except for essentially open terrain with minimal obstacles, or along dirt roads, the PerceptOR vehicles were unable navigate without numerous, repeated operator intervention. The LAGR program was designed to build on the methodology started in PerceptOR while seeking to overcome the technical challenges exposed by the PerceptOR tests. == LAGR goals == The principal goal of LAGR was to accelerate progress in off navigation of UGVs. Additional, synergistic goals included (1) establishing benchmarking methodology for measuring progress for autonomous robots operating in unstructured environments, (2) advancing machine vision and thus enabling long-range perception, and (3) increasing the number of institutions and individuals who were able to contribute to forefront UGV research. == Structure and rationale of the LAGR program == The LAGR program was designed to focus on developing new science for robot perception and control rather than on new hardware. Thus, it was decided to create a fleet of identical, relatively simple robots that would be supplied to the LAGR researchers, who were members of competitive teams, freeing them to concentrate on algorithm development. The teams were each given two robots of the standard design. They developed new software on these robots, and then sent the code to a government test team that then tested that code on Government robots at various test courses. These courses were located throughout the US and were not previously known to the teams. In this way, the code from all teams could be tested in essentially identical circumstances. After an initial startup period, the code development/test cycle was repeated about once every month. The standard robot was designed and built by the Carnegie Mellon University National Robotics Engineering Center (CMU NREC). The vehicles’ computers were preloaded with a modular “Baseline” perception and navigation system that was essentially the same system that CMU NREC had created for the PerceptOR program and was considered to represent the state-of-the-art at the inception of LAGR. The modular nature of the Baseline system allowed the researchers to replace parts of the Baseline code with their own modules and still have a complete working system without having to create an entire navigation system from scratch. Thus, for example, they were able to compare the performance of their own obstacle detection module with that of the Baseline code, while holding everything else fixed. The Baseline code also served as a fixed reference – in any environment and at any time in the program, teams’ code could be compared to the Baseline code. This rapid cycle gave the Government team and the performer teams quick feedback and allowed the Government team to design test courses that challenged the performers in specific perception tasks and whose difficulty was likely to challenge, but not overwhelm, the performers’ current capabilities. Teams were not required to submit new code for every test, but usually did. Despite this leeway, some teams found the rapid test cycle distracting to their long term progress and would have preferred a longer interval between tests. === Phase II === To advance to Phase II, each team had to modify the Baseline code so that on the final 3 tests of Phase I of the government tests, robots running the team's code averaged at least 10% faster than a vehicle running the original Baseline code. This rather modest “Go/ No Go” metric was chosen to allow teams to choose risky, but promising approaches that might not be fully developed in the first 18 months of the program. All 8 teams achieved this metric, with some scoring more twice the speed of the Baseline on the later tests which was the objective for Phase II. Note that the Phase I Go / No Go metric was such that teams were not in completion with each other for a limited number of slots on Phase II: any number of teams, from eight to zero could make the grade. This strategy by DARPA was to designed to encourage cooperation and even code sharing among the teams. == The LAGR teams == Eight teams were selected as performers in Phase I, the first 18 months of LAGR. The teams were from Applied Perception (Principal Investigator [PI] Mark Ollis), Georgia Tech (PI Tucker Balch), Jet Propulsion Laboratory (PI Larry Matthies), Net-Scale Technologies (PI Urs Muller), NIST (PI James Albus), Stanford University (PI Sebastian Thrun), SRI International (PI Robert Bolles), and University of Pennsylvania (PI Daniel Lee). The Stanford team resigned at the end of Phase I to focus its efforts on the DARPA Grand Challenge; it was replaced by a team from the University of Colorado, Boulder (PI Greg Grudic). Also in Phase II, the NIST team suspended its participation in the competition and instead concentrated on assembling the best software elements from each team into a single system. Roger Bostelman became PI of that effort. == The LAGR vehicle == The LAGR vehicle, which was about the size of a supermarket shopping cart, was designed to be simple to control. (A companion DARPA program, Learning Locomotion, addressed complex motor control.) It was battery powered and had two independently driven wheelchair motors in the front, and two caster wheels in the rear. When the front wheels were rotated in the same direction the robot was driven either forward or reverse. When these wheels were driven in opposite directions, the robot turned. The ~ $30,000 cost of the LAGR vehicle meant that a fleet could be built and distributed to a number of teams expanding on the field of researchers who had traditionally participated in DARPA robotics programs. The vehicle's top speed of about 3 miles/ hour and relatively modest weight of ~100 kg meant that it posed a much reduced safety hazard compared to vehicles used in previous programs in unmanned ground vehicles and thus further reduced the budget required for each team to manage its robot. Nevertheless, the LAGR vehicles were sophisticated machines. Their sensor suite included 2 pairs of stereo cameras, an accelerometer, a bumper sensor, wheel encoders, and a GPS. The vehicle also had three computers that were user-programmable. == Scientific results == A cornerstone of the program was incorporation of learned behaviors in the robots. In addition, the program used passive optical systems to accomplish long-range scene analysis. The difficulty of testing UGV navigation in unstructured, off-road environments made accurate, objective measurement of progress a challenging task. While no absolute measure of performance had been defined in LAGR, the relative comparison of a team's code to that of the Baseline code on a given course demonstrated whether progress was being made in that environment. By the conclusion of the program, testing showed that many of the performers had attained leaps in performance. In particular, average autonomous speeds were increased by factor of 3 and useful visual perception was extended to ranges as far as 100 meters. While LAGR did succeed in extending the useful range of visual perception, this was primarily done by either pixel or patch-based color or texture analysis. Object recognition was not directly addressed. Even though the LAGR vehicle had a WAAS GPS, its position was never determined down to the width of the vehicle, so it was hard for the systems to re-use obstacle maps of areas the robots had previously traversed since the GPS continually drifted. The drift was especially severe if there was a forest canopy. A few teams developed visual odometry algorithms that essentially eliminated this drift.
Glossary of robotics
Robotics is the branch of technology that deals with the design, construction, operation, structural disposition, manufacture and application of robots. Robotics is related to the sciences of electronics, engineering, mechanics, and software. The following is a list of common definitions related to the Robotics field. == A == Actuator: a motor that translates control signals into mechanical movement. The control signals are usually electrical but may, more rarely, be pneumatic or hydraulic. The power supply may likewise be any of these. It is common for electrical control to be used to modulate a high-power pneumatic or hydraulic motor. Aerobot: a robot capable of independent flight on other planets. A type of aerial robot. Arduino: The current platform of choice for small-scale robotic experimentation and physical computing. Artificial intelligence: is the intelligence of machines and the branch of computer science that aims to create it. Aura (satellite): a robotic spacecraft launched by NASA in 2004 which collects atmospheric data from Earth. Automaton: an early self-operating robot, performing exactly the same actions, over and over. Autonomous vehicle: a vehicle equipped with an autopilot system, which is capable of driving from one point to another without input from a human operator. == B == Biomimetic: See Bionics. Bionics: also known as biomimetics, biognosis, biomimicry, or bionical creativity engineering is the application of biological methods and systems found in nature to the study and design of engineering systems and modern technology. == C == CAD/CAM (computer-aided design and computer-aided manufacturing): These systems and their data may be integrated into robotic operations. Čapek, Karel: Czech author who coined the term 'robot' in his 1921 play, Rossum's Universal Robots. Chandra X-ray Observatory: a robotic spacecraft launched by NASA in 1999 to collect astronomical data. Cloud robotics: robots empowered with more capacity and intelligence from cloud. Combat, robot: a hobby or sport event where two or more robots fight in an arena to disable each other. This has developed from a hobby in the 1990s to several TV series worldwide. Cruise missile: a robot-controlled guided missile that carries an explosive payload. Cyborg: also known as a cybernetic organism, a being with both biological and artificial (e.g. electronic, mechanical or robotic) parts. == D == Degrees of freedom: the extent to which a robot can move itself; expressed in terms of Cartesian coordinates (x, y, and z) and angular movements (yaw, pitch, and roll). Delta robot: a tripod linkage, used to construct fast-acting manipulators with a wide range of movement. Drive Power: The energy source or sources for the robot actuators. == E == Emergent behaviour, a complicated resultant behaviour that emerges from the repeated operation of simple underlying behaviours. Envelope (Space), Maximum The volume of space encompassing the maximum designed movements of all robot parts including the end-effector, workpiece, and attachments. Explosive ordnance disposal robot A mobile robot designed to assess whether an object contains explosives; some carry detonators that can be deposited at the object and activated after the robot withdraws. == F == FIRST(For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology): an organization founded by inventor Dean Kamen in 1989 in order to develop ways to inspire students in engineering and technology fields. Forward chaining: a process in which events or received data are considered by an entity to intelligently adapt its behavior. == G == Gynoid: A humanoid robot designed to look like a human female. == H == Haptic: tactile feedback technology using the operator's sense of touch. Also sometimes applied to robot manipulators with their own touch sensitivity. Hexapod (platform): A movable platform using six linear actuators. Often used in flight simulators and fairground rides, they also have applications as a robotic manipulator. Hexapod (walker): A six-legged walking robot, using a simple insect-like locomotion. Human–computer interaction. Humanoid: A robotic entity designed to resemble a human being in form, function, or both. Hydraulics: the control of mechanical force and movement, generated by the application of liquid under pressure. cf. pneumatics. == I == Industrial robot: A reprogrammable, multifunctional manipulator designed to move material, parts, tools, or specialized devices through variable programmed motions for the performance of a variety of tasks. Insect robot: A small robot designed to imitate insect behaviors rather than complex human behaviors. == K == Kalman filter: a mathematical technique to estimate the value of a sensor measurement, from a series of intermittent and noisy values. Kinematics: the study of motion, as applied to robots. This includes both the design of linkages to perform motion, their power, control and stability; also their planning, such as choosing a sequence of movements to achieve a broader task. Inverse Kinematics: the process of determining joint angles required for a robot's end-effector to reach a desired position and orientation in space. Used in motion planning to calculate motor commands from target positions. == L == Linear actuator A form of motor that generates a linear movement directly. == M == Manipulator or gripper: A robotic 'hand'. Mobile robot: A self-propelled and self-contained robot that is capable of moving over a mechanically unconstrained course. Muting: The deactivation of a presence-sensing safeguarding device during a portion of the robot cycle. Mecanum wheel: A wheel fitted with angled rollers that enables a robot vehicle to move in multiple directions, including sideways. == O == Ornithopter – An aerial robot or drone that achieves flight through a flapping-wing mechanism rather than rotating blades or fixed wings, often utilized for highly maneuverable flight. == P == Parallel manipulator: an articulated robot or manipulator based on a number of kinematic chains, actuators and joints, in parallel. cf. serial manipulator. Pendant: Any portable control device that permits an operator to control the robot from within the restricted envelope (space) of the robot. Pneumatics: the control of mechanical force and movement, generated by the application of compressed gas. cf. hydraulics. Powered exoskeleton: is a wearable mobile machine that allow for limb movement with increased strength and endurance. Prosthetic robots: programmable manipulators or devices for missing human limbs. == R == Remote manipulator: A manipulator under direct human control, often used for work with hazardous materials. Robonaut: a development project conducted by NASA to create humanoid robots capable of using space tools and working in similar environments to suited astronauts. == S == Sensor fusion:The process of combining data from multiple sensors, such as LiDAR, cameras, global positioning systems (GPS), and inertial measurement units (IMUs), to produce a more accurate and reliable understanding of an environment than using a single sensor alone. It is widely used in robotics and autonomous systems to improve perception, localization, and decision-making. Serial manipulator: an articulated robot or manipulator with a single series kinematic chain of actuators. cf. parallel manipulator. Service robots are machines that extend human capabilities. Servo, a motor that moves to and maintains a set position under command, rather than continuously moving. Servomechanism An automatic device that uses error-sensing negative feedback to correct the performance of a mechanism. Single Point of Control The ability to operate the robot such that initiation or robot motion from one source of control is possible only from that source and cannot be overridden from another source. Slow Speed Control A mode of robot motion control where the velocity of the robot is limited to allow persons sufficient time either to withdraw the hazardous motion or stop the robot. Snake robot A robot component resembling a tentacle or elephant's trunk, where many small actuators are used to allow continuous curved motion of a robot component, with many degrees of freedom. This is usually applied to snake-arm robots, which use this as a flexible manipulator. A rarer application is the snakebot, where the entire robot is mobile and snake-like, so as to gain access through narrow spaces. Stepper motor Stewart platform A movable platform using six linear actuators, hence also known as a Hexapod. Subsumption architecture A robot architecture that uses a modular, bottom-up design beginning with the least complex behavioral tasks. Surgical robot, a remote manipulator used for keyhole surgery Swarm robotics involve large numbers of mostly simple physical robots. Their actions may seek to incorporate emergent behavior observed in social insects (swarm intelligence). Synchro == T == Teach Mode: The control state that al
TasteDive
TasteDive (formerly named TasteKid) is an entertainment recommendation engine for films, TV shows, music, video games, books, people, places, and brands. It also has elements of a social media site; it allows users to connect with "tastebuds", people with like minded interests. == History == TasteDive was founded in 2008 as TasteKid by brothers Andrei Oghina and Felix Oghina. In 2019, it was acquired by Qloo headquartered in NYC. "Qloo has built for developers and enterprises what TasteDive has built for individuals". == Description == When a user types in the title of a film or TV show, the site's algorithm provides a list of similar content. It provides recommendations for TV shows to watch based on films liked by the user, and vice versa. It also provides recommendations for music, video games, and books, and includes film and TV trailers and music videos. An account is free and is not required to receive recommendations, but recommendations are more accurate for those with an account. The more a user explores the site, the more the site learns about the user's preferences and the better the results become. The site also has a social media aspect where one can see activity and gain recommendations from other users, how many others in the community like or dislike any recommendation, and how popular their tastes are within the TasteDive community. The main competitors of TasteDive are Taste App, Trakt.tv and Tastoid.