2015 NRI PI meeting presentation

1. An NSF Perspective on the
National Robotics Initiative
Jeff Trinkle
Program Director
National Robotics Initiative
National Science Foundation
Directorate: Computer and Information Science and Engineering
Division: Information and Intelligent Systems

2. The National Robotics Initiative (NRI)
A nationally coordinated program
across multiple government agencies
to develop the next generation of
robotics, to advance the capability
and usability of such systems and
artifacts, and to encourage existing
and new communities to focus on
innovative application areas.

3. NRI Serves Multiple Key
National Priorities
Manufacturing &
Smart Systems
Agriculture
Emergency Response &
Disaster Resiliency
Health & Wellbeing
Transportation &
Energy
Personal and
Homeland Security
Space and Undersea
Exploration
Education and
Workforce
Development

4. The Long-Term Vision:
Collaborative Robots (Co-Robots)
New machines that will work safely beside people
as co-workers, co-protectors, co-explorers, and co-
inhabitants, leveraging the strengths of both, to
enhance personal safety, health, and productivity.

5. Basic Research Themes in
Solicitation
• Autonomy
• Sensing and perception
• Modeling and analysis
• Design and materials
• Communication and
interfaces
• Planning and control
• Artificial intelligence
• Assistive technologies
• Cognition and learning
• Algorithms and
hardware
• Assistive technologies
• Application-inspired
• Platform-specific
• STEM learning
• Social, behavioral, and
economic sciences

6. Applied Research and
Development Themes
• Establish open systems (hardware and software)
upon which the community can build
• Establish competitions among funded projects
• Create a repository of sharable software, hardware,
and data – benchmarking
• Develop physical and virtual test beds
• Transfer technology to participating agencies
• Produce empirical findings in the use of robotics for
STEM education
• Sponsor multi-faceted collaborative efforts

7. NRI Funding Data Since Inception
Fiscal
Year
Props
Recvd
$$
Requested
Props
Funded
$
Commitd
%
Success
FY 2012 687 $1,000M 61 $42M 9%
FY 2013 421 $442M 52 $37M 12%
FY 2014 337 $261M 52 $37M 15%
FY 2015 330 $229M 66 $37M 20%
Total 1775 ~ $2B 231 $153M 13%
• Funded 231 proposals ~ 150 projects
• FY 2016 submission deadline – March 7, 2016

8. mani/loco
18%
design/cntrl
17%
HRI/comm
11%
assistv
10%
medical
9%
plan/learn/rsn
4%
swarms/net
4%
manufacturing
4%
STEM
2%
other
2%
perception
19%
Numbers of Awards by Area
• Total proposals
funded: 231
– NSF 168
– Partners 61

9. A Few Observations
• Strong participation in process by partner agencies
– Recognition of partner agency missions by PIs colors basic
research agendas
– Agency partners see proposals that address problems of
interest to them in ways they have not considered
– NRI has helped partners establish research efforts that
they may not have been able to establish otherwise
• Breadth of NRI fosters interdisciplinary collaborations

10. Survey by NRI PI Meeting Organizers
1. How has NRI impacted you and your community?
2. Should the scope of NRI be changed or broadened
to include other topics, disciplines, or technical
areas? If so, what topics, disciplines, or technical
areas would you suggest?
3. What lessons have you learned from your
experience with the NRI program?
4. Going forward, how could the NRI program be
modified to make it even better?
5. If you have any additional comments, please
include them here.

11. 1. How has NRI impacted you and
your community?
• Facilitated broader collaborations
• The constancy of the NRI program sustains
academic robotics labs which encourages more
young researchers to enter robotics
• NRI STEM materials implemented in about 200 K-12
schools, impacting 10,000 students in 2015
• Building community of US robotics researchers
through NRI PI meeting
• Increased visibility of agricultural problems, which led
to proposal that would not otherwise have been
written
• Focus on co-robots is detrimental, causing people to
propose things outside their expertise

12. 2. Should the scope of NRI be changed or
broadened to include other topics,
disciplines, or technical areas?
• Don’t broaden, since that will dilute impact on HRI focus
• Emphasis on HRI discourages proposals on other important
topics
• Broaden to include anything robotics
• Broaden to include autonomy
• Overlap with CPS is confusing
• Bring in more federal agencies and increase funding
• More focus on various topics:
– Only home for exoskeleton research outside DOD
– More funding for medical robotics
– Human safety
– More focus on social sciences
– Algorithmic robotics
– Power sources – esp for micro robotics
– Leave out sociology and psychology

13. 3. What lessons have you learned from
your experience with the NRI program?
• NRI fosters collaboration:
– PI meetings are very high-value and build community
– Learned challenges and rewards of multi-disciplinary
projects
– NRI is like a grand challenge in HRI. Great way to
solve tough problems
– Bring partners together under NRI broadens PIs’
views of potential impact of robotics
– Made new connections to federal agencies
• NRI is just another NSF program
• Intriguing risky projects are less likely to be funded
• Not enough funding Depressing when HC-rated
proposals get declined

14. 4. Going forward, how could the NRI
program be modified to make it even
better?
• More funding US per capita spending is lagging EU,
China, and Korea.
• Invite start-up companies to NRI PIs meeting
• More funding for robotics-based STEM education
• Don’t make large budget cuts
• Focus of NRI to co-robots is not technically sound
• DOD and NIH should be fully invested in NRI
• More time and funding to mature the technology
• Need a manufacturing challenge
• Better reviews
• Bring back proposal size categories

15. 5. If you have any additional comments,
please include them here.
• Excellent catalyst for growth of US robotics research
• Keep NRI going
• NRI needs more funds to compete globally
• NRI could be better organized about its impact on K-
12 STEM education and outreach
• Henrik Christensen should get a special award for
his role in starting the NRI
• The multi-agency aspect of NRI could serve as a
model for other interdisciplinary programs
• Walls between agencies should be eliminated

16. • Copyrighted material used under Fair Use. If you are the copyright holder and believe
your material has been used unfairly, or if you have any suggestions, feedback, or
support, please contact: ciseitsupport@nsf.gov.
• Except where otherwise indicated, permission is granted to copy, distribute, and/or
modify all images in this document under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation
license, Version 1.2 or any later version published by the Free Software Foundation;
with no Invariant Sections, no Front-Cover Texts, and no Back-Cover Texts. A copy of
the license is included in the section entitled “GNU Free Documentation license” at
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:GNU_Free_Documentation_License.
• The inclusion of a logo does not express or imply the endorsement by NSF of the
entities' products, services, or enterprises.
Credits