EvoRobogami: co-designing with humans in evolutionary robotics experiments
Pages 168 - 176
Abstract
We study the effects of injecting human-generated designs into the initial population of an evolutionary robotics experiment, where subsequent population of robots are optimised via a Genetic Algorithm and MAP-Elites. First, human participants interact via a graphical front-end to explore a directly-parameterised legged robot design space and attempt to produce robots via a combination of intuition and trial-and-error that perform well in a range of environments. Environments are generated whose corresponding high-performance robot designs range from intuitive to complex and hard to grasp. Once the human designs have been collected, their impact on the evolutionary process is assessed by replacing a varying number of designs in the initial population with human designs and subsequently running the evolutionary algorithm. Our results suggest that a balance of random and hand-designed initial solutions provides the best performance for the problems considered, and that human designs are most valuable when the problem is intuitive. The influence of human design in an evolutionary algorithm is a highly understudied area, and the insights in this paper may be valuable to the area of AI-based design more generally.
References
[1]
Alberto Alvarez, Jose Font, Steve Dahlskog, and Julian Togelius. 2021. Assessing the Effects of Interacting with MAP-Elites. Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Interactive Digital Entertainment 17, 1 (Oct. 2021), 124--131. https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/AIIDE/article/view/18899
[2]
Joshua Auerbach, Deniz Aydin, Andrea Maesani, Przemyslaw Kornatowski, Titus Cieslewski, Grégoire Heitz, Pradeep Fernando, Ilya Loshchilov, Ludovic Daler, and Dario Floreano. 2014. Robogen: Robot generation through artificial evolution. In ALIFE 14: The Fourteenth International Conference on the Synthesis and Simulation of Living Systems. MIT Press, 136--137.
[3]
Wolfgang Banzhaf. 2000. Interactive evolution. Evolutionary Computation 1 (2000), 228--234.
[4]
Josh Bongard, Paul Beliveau, and Gregory Hornby. 2012. Avoiding Local Optima with Interactive Evolutionary Robotics. In Proceedings of the 14th Annual Conference Companion on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation (Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA) (GECCO '12). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1405--1406.
[5]
Josh C Bongard. 2013. Evolutionary robotics. Commun. ACM 56, 8 (2013), 74--83.
[6]
Luigi Cardamone, Daniele Loiacono, and Pier Luca Lanzi. 2011. Interactive evolution for the procedural generation of tracks in a high-end racing game. In Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation. 395--402.
[7]
J. Clune, A. Chen, and H. Lipson. 2013. Upload any object and evolve it: Injecting complex geometric patterns into CPPNS for further evolution. In 2013 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation. 3395--3402.
[8]
Stelian Coros, Bernhard Thomaszewski, Gioacchino Noris, Shinjiro Sueda, Moira Forberg, Robert W. Sumner, Wojciech Matusik, and Bernd Bickel. 2013. Computational Design of Mechanical Characters. ACM Trans. Graph. 32, 4, Article 83 (jul 2013), 12 pages.
[9]
Ruta Desai, Beichen Li, Ye Yuan, and Stelian Coros. 2018. Interactive co-design of form and function for legged robots using the adjoint method. arXiv preprint arXiv:1801.00385 (2018).
[10]
Stephane Doncieux, Nicolas Bredeche, Jean-Baptiste Mouret, and Agoston E Gusz Eiben. 2015. Evolutionary robotics: what, why, and where to. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 2 (2015), 4.
[11]
Frederic Gruau and Kameel Quatramaran. 1996. Cellular encoding for interactive evolutionary robotics. Technical Report.
[12]
Adam Gaier, Alexander Asteroth, and Jean-Baptiste Mouret. 2018. Data-efficient design exploration through surrogate-assisted illumination. Evolutionary computation 26, 3 (2018), 381--410.
[13]
John Harding and Cecilie Brandt-Olsen. 2018. Biomorpher: Interactive evolution for parametric design. International Journal of Architectural Computing 16, 2 (2018), 144--163. arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1177/1478077118778579
[14]
Frank Hoisl. 2012. Visual, interactive 3D spatial grammars in CAD for computational design synthesis. Ph.D. Dissertation. Technische Universität München.
[15]
David Howard, Agoston E Eiben, Danielle Frances Kennedy, Jean-Baptiste Mouret, Philip Valencia, and Dave Winkler. 2019. Evolving embodied intelligence from materials to machines. Nature Machine Intelligence 1, 1 (2019), 12--19.
[16]
David Howard, Jack O'Connor, Jordan Letchford, James Brett, Therese Joseph, Sophia Lin, Daniel Furby, and Gary W Delaney. 2021. Getting a Grip: in Materio Evolution of Membrane Morphology for Soft Robotic Jamming Grippers. arXiv:2111.01952 [cs.RO]
[17]
Gerard Howard, Thomas Lowe, and Wade Geles. 2020. Diversity-based design assist for large legged robots. In Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference Companion. 81--82.
[18]
D. Katagami and S. Yamada. 2002. Interactive evolutionary robotics from different viewpoints of observation. In IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, Vol. 2. 1108--1113 vol.2.
[19]
Eric-Wubbo Lameijer, Joost N Kok, Thomas Bäck, and Ad P IJzerman. 2006. The molecule evoluator. An interactive evolutionary algorithm for the design of drug-like molecules. Journal of chemical information and modeling 46, 2 (2006), 545--552.
[20]
Joel Lehman, Jeff Clune, Dusan Misevic, Christoph Adami, Lee Altenberg, Julie Beaulieu, Peter J Bentley, Samuel Bernard, Guillaume Beslon, David M Bryson, et al. 2020. The surprising creativity of digital evolution: A collection of anecdotes from the evolutionary computation and artificial life research communities. Artificial life 26, 2 (2020), 274--306.
[21]
Joel Lehman and Kenneth O Stanley. 2011. Evolving a diversity of virtual creatures through novelty search and local competition. In Proceedings of the 13th annual conference on Genetic and evolutionary computation. 211--218.
[22]
Antonios Liapis, Georgios N Yannakakis, and Julian Togelius. 2013. Sentient sketchbook: computer-assisted game level authoring. (2013).
[23]
Hod Lipson and Jordan B Pollack. 2000. Automatic design and manufacture of robotic lifeforms. Nature 406, 6799 (2000), 974--978.
[24]
Jon McCormack et al. 1993. Interactive evolution of L-system grammars for computer graphics modelling. Complex Systems: from biology to computation (1993), 118--130.
[25]
Vittorio Megaro, Bernhard Thomaszewski, Maurizio Nitti, Otmar Hilliges, Markus Gross, and Stelian Coros. 2015. Interactive Design of 3D-Printable Robotic Creatures. ACM Trans. Graph. 34, 6, Article 216 (oct 2015), 9 pages.
[26]
Jean-Baptiste Mouret and Jeff Clune. 2015. Illuminating search spaces by mapping elites. arXiv preprint arXiv:1504.04909 (2015).
[27]
Stefano Nolfi and Dario Floreano. 2000. Evolutionary robotics: The biology, intelligence, and technology of self-organizing machines. MIT press.
[28]
Justin K Pugh, Lisa B Soros, and Kenneth O Stanley. 2016. Quality diversity: A new frontier for evolutionary computation. Frontiers in Robotics and AI 3 (2016), 40.
[29]
Juan C. Quiroz, Amit Banerjee, Sushil J. Louis, and Sergiu M. Dascalu. 2009. Document design with interactive evolution. 309--319. Copyright: Copyright 2009 Elsevier B.V, All rights reserved.
[30]
Jacob Schrum, Jake Gutierrez, Vanessa Volz, Jialin Liu, Simon Lucas, and Sebastian Risi. 2020. Interactive Evolution and Exploration within Latent Level-Design Space of Generative Adversarial Networks. In Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference (Cancún, Mexico) (GECCO '20). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 148--156.
[31]
Adriana Schulz, Cynthia Sung, Andrew Spielberg, Wei Zhao, Robin Cheng, Eitan Grinspun, Daniela Rus, and Wojciech Matusik. 2017. Interactive robogami: An end-to-end system for design of robots with ground locomotion. The International Journal of Robotics Research 36, 10 (2017), 1131--1147. arXiv:https://doi.org/10.1177/0278364917723465
[32]
Adriana Schulz, Jie Xu, Bo Zhu, Changxi Zheng, Eitan Grinspun, and Wojciech Matusik. 2017. Interactive design space exploration and optimization for cad models. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 36, 4 (2017), 1--14.
[33]
Jimmy Secretan, Nicholas Beato, David B D Ambrosio, Adelein Rodriguez, Adam Campbell, and Kenneth O Stanley. 2008. Picbreeder: evolving pictures collaboratively online. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. 1759--1768.
[34]
Karl Sims. 1992. Interactive evolution of dynamical systems. In Toward a practice of autonomous systems: Proceedings of the first European conference on artificial life. 171--178.
[35]
Karl Sims. 1994. Evolving virtual creatures. In Proceedings of the 21st annual conference on Computer graphics and interactive techniques. 15--22.
[36]
Alessandro Tasora, Radu Serban, Hammad Mazhar, Arman Pazouki, Daniel Melanz, Jonathan Fleischmann, Michael Taylor, Hiroyuki Sugiyama, and Dan Negrut. 2015. Chrono: An open source multi-physics dynamics engine. In International Conference on High Performance Computing in Science and Engineering. Springer, 19--49.
[37]
Nobuyuki Umetani, Yuki Koyama, Ryan Schmidt, and Takeo Igarashi. 2014. Pteromys: Interactive design and optimization of free-formed free-flight model airplanes. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG) 33, 4 (2014), 1--10.
Index Terms
- EvoRobogami: co-designing with humans in evolutionary robotics experiments
Recommendations
Diversity-based design assist for large legged robots
GECCO '20: Proceedings of the 2020 Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference CompanionWe combine MAP-Elites and highly parallelisable simulation to explore the design space of a class of large legged robots, which stand at around 2m tall and whose design and construction is not well-studied. The simulation is modified to account for ...
A comparison of illumination algorithms in unbounded spaces
GECCO '17: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference CompanionIllumination algorithms are a new class of evolutionary algorithms capable of producing large archives of diverse and high-performing solutions. Examples of such algorithms include Novelty Search with Local Competition (NSLC), the Multi-dimensional ...
Comparing multimodal optimization and illumination
GECCO '17: Proceedings of the Genetic and Evolutionary Computation Conference CompanionIllumination algorithms are a recent addition to the evolutionary computation toolbox that allows the generation of many diverse and high-performing solutions in a single run. Nevertheless, traditional multimodal optimization algorithms also search for ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
July 2022
1472 pages
Copyright © 2022 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 08 July 2022
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Funding Sources
- National Science Foundation
Conference
GECCO '22
Sponsor:
Acceptance Rates
Overall Acceptance Rate 1,669 of 4,410 submissions, 38%
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 126Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)39
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)3
Reflects downloads up to 22 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View allView Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in