Artificial cognition vs. artificial intelligence for next-generation autonomous robotic agents

The trend in industrial/service robotics is to develop robots that can cooperate with people, interacting with them in an autonomous, safe and purposive way. These are the fundamental elements characterizing the fourth and the fifth industrial revolutions (4IR, 5IR): the crucial innovation is the adoption of intelligent technologies that can allow the development of cyber-physical systems, similar if not superior to humans. The common wisdom is that intelligence might be provided by AI (Artificial Intelligence), a claim that is supported more by media coverage and commercial interests than by solid scientific evidence. AI is currently conceived in a quite broad sense, encompassing LLMs and a lot of other things, without any unifying principle, but self-motivating for the success in various areas. The current view of AI robotics mostly follows a purely disembodied approach that is consistent with the old-fashioned, Cartesian mind-body dualism, reflected in the software-hardware distinction inherent to the von Neumann computing architecture. The working hypothesis of this position paper is that the road to the next generation of autonomous robotic agents with cognitive capabilities requires a fully brain-inspired, embodied cognitive approach that avoids the trap of mind-body dualism and aims at the full integration of Bodyware and Cogniware. We name this approach Artificial Cognition (ACo) and ground it in Cognitive Neuroscience. It is specifically focused on proactive knowledge acquisition based on bidirectional human-robot interaction: the practical advantage is to enhance generalization and explainability. Moreover, we believe that a brain-inspired network of interactions is necessary for allowing humans to cooperate with artificial cognitive agents, building a growing level of personal trust and reciprocal accountability: this is clearly missing, although actively sought, in current AI. The ACo approach is a work in progress that can take advantage of a number of research threads, some of them antecedent the early attempts to define AI concepts and methods. In the rest of the paper we will consider some of the building blocks that need to be re-visited in a unitary framework: the principles of developmental robotics, the methods of action representation with prospection capabilities, and the crucial role of social interaction.

Decentralized control and local information for robust and adaptive decentralized Deep Reinforcement Learning

Decentralization is a central characteristic of biological motor control that allows for fast responses relying on local sensory information. In contrast, the current trend of Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL) based approaches to motor control follows a centralized paradigm using a single, holistic controller that has to untangle the whole input information space. This motivates to ask whether decentralization as seen in biological control architectures might also be beneficial for embodied sensori-motor control systems when using DRL. To answer this question, we provide an analysis and comparison of eight control architectures for adaptive locomotion that were derived for a four-legged agent, but with their degree of decentralization varying systematically between the extremes of fully centralized and fully decentralized. Our comparison shows that learning speed is significantly enhanced in distributed architectures-while still reaching the same high performance level of centralized architectures-due to smaller search spaces and local costs providing more focused information for learning. Second, we find an increased robustness of the learning process in the decentralized cases-it is less demanding to hyperparameter selection and less prone to becoming trapped in poor local minima. Finally, when examining generalization to uneven terrains-not used during training-we find best performance for an intermediate architecture that is decentralized, but integrates only local information from both neighboring legs. Together, these findings demonstrate beneficial effects of distributing control into decentralized units and relying on local information. This appears as a promising approach towards more robust DRL and better generalization towards adaptive behavior.