Hiroshi Ishiguro is a Japanese roboticist who has created highly human-like androids in his own image and the images of others. His research focuses on developing humanoid robots that can serve as social partners for humans. He believes that as robots become more human-like in their interactions, humans will be able to form genuine emotional attachments to them. However, fully realizing his vision will require overcoming significant technical challenges in areas like movement, speech recognition, and integrating all of a robot's sensors.

2. Engineering & Technology October 2013 www.EandTmagazine.com
42 AUTOMATION ROBOTICS
Robots could become potential life partners if Japanese roboticist Hiroshi Ishiguro has his way.The
world renowned scientist and university lecturer tells E&T of the robotic skeletons that lie in the
cupboards of University of Osaka’s Intelligent Robotics Laboratory.
HIROSHI ISHIGURO sometimes
asks interviewers whether they
believe the man seated in front
of them is a human or a robot.
This would be implausible in
any other situation, except
for the fact that he is the man
who created a robot in his own
image and has helped others,
for large sums of money and
a four-month development
period, to do the same.
His radical predictions of
futuristic human and robot
social hierarchies, in addition to
his pioneering research in the
field of humanoid robotics, have
made him a minor celebrity in
tech-obsessed Japan. Ishiguro
has received funding from the
Japanese government and is
also a professor in two of the top
universities: Osaka and Kyoto.
QWhat are the key drivers
of your research into
humanoid robotics?
AInitially my purpose was to
develop interactive robots;
I wanted to have an ‘ideal design’
prototype and this is why I
developed the very humanlike
android robots. Then I developed
a complex teleoperated
gemenoid robot. Today our key
driver is exploring how robot
operators adapt to working with
a ‘human’ body. In our case a
computer catches the operator’s
movements and voice, which
are then duplicated in the robot.
The operator recognises the
gemenoid body as his or her
own.
Like a phantom limb, we are
using the gemenoid as a
‘phantom body’. We are also
developing minimal design of
robots, trying to make them
simpler, for practical use. We
can learn a lot about minimal
design from the gemenoid, as it
is a very complex machine and
is expensive so it is not practical.
QToday society is
accepting of robotics in
an industrial environment,
but what role do you see
humanoid robots playing in
the future?
AThe most important aspect
of an interactive robot is its
role as a social partner for a
human. A human can project
many things onto a robot, so
essentially studying a social
relationship between a human
and a robot will allow us to
comment on general human
society. We need to study
phenomena that happen in ‘real
society’ before we can discuss
the possibility of integrating
robots into society. Before it was
mostly important to have
practical robots, but now the
next two challenges in robotics
are three things. To minimise
more, to use the human shape,
and represent the human soul.
Do you believe that we have a
soul? This is why we build
humanoid and telenoid robots:
to project the human soul.
QDo you think a human
being could ever become
genuinely attached to a robot
as a social partner?
AYes, that is my goal: for a
human to become
believably affectionate towards
a robot social partner. Belief is
the single most important aspect
of a human being. You believe
that I am a human, right? The
human brain is just guessing,
perceiving and believing.
Everything is just a kind of
illusion, or a trick, because the
human brain cannot process
everything. Everything is
subjective.
QSociety suggests people’s
reliance on computers
has damaged human
relationships to a certain
extent. Is introducing robots
into this home environment
not a similarly dangerous
concept?
AWell, before society said the
computer is dangerous, now
you say the robot is dangerous.
It is the same; a robot is just a
simple extension of the
computer. Computer processors;
actuators: that is a robot. The
reason I am interested in
humanoid robotics is because
they are a sort of intermediate
between the digital world and
physical world.
QIt’s been observed that
Europeans display a
different level of
receptiveness to robots in
comparison with the
Japanese, who are more
accepting. Why do you think
that is?
ARelatively speaking I don’t
see any differences between
Japanese and European people.
Of course when they are talking
about robots they have differing
opinions but when they come
face to face with an actual robot
their reactions are very similar.
Asimo (Honda’s android robot)
is being presented in many
countries and the reaction of
children in particular,
regardless of background, is
exactly the same. Their >
ByAbi Grogan

3. Engineering & Technology October 2013 www.EandTmagazine.com
44 AUTOMATION ROBOTICS
< preconceptions may be
different but once they start to
interact with the robot they
forget. It all lies in education. For
example, French people, they are
more accepting because they love
Japanese cartoons where robots
are commonly depicted. We will
share the culture soon.
QFrom a technical
perspective humanoid
robotics are designed in
human likeness with
human-inspired sensory
capability. How are the speech
systems of your robots
configured?
AWe are doing ongoing
studies, but in the future I
would like to integrate the use of
online search engines and
information banks such as
Google and Wikipedia as a direct
point of reference for the
computer. It’s quite difficult to
develop an autonomous
interactive robot but we are
mostly studying conversational
patterns, analysing sensory data.
A lot of our speech system
is inspired by the Turing Test.
But we have many things to
improve; the computer has
to be very powerful to gather
such a huge amount of data
when it holds a conversation to
have a very quick, humanlike
reaction. We still need
to work on the android’s
logical flow of conversation
and also the android needs
to be more emotional.
QTo what extent is the
visual system similar to a
human’s and how does it ‘see’?
AComputer vision technology
is advancing so quickly at
the moment. If you go to a
computer vision conference
you’ll be amazed at the computer
vision technology on offer there.
Prior to the Kinect, an average
laser scanner was very expensive
and, although we used one, most
research labs couldn’t afford to.
Plus the Kinect runs on an
android system which is a
familiar format for everyone.
I think with this pattern
recognition, now the vision
system is at a human level, at
least it is much better than an
elderly person’s sight!
QHow do your robots ‘feel’?
What sensory arrays do
they use?
AMy gemenoids have a full
body sensory array; the only
thing we can’t really integrate is
taste and smell. Although we do
actually have a team of
researchers in Japan working on
these two remaining sensors, if
we wanted to, eventually we
could install them. But the
flip-side is that an android has no
need to eat so it would be a
relatively pointless and
expensive integration.
QHow do your robots
process what they are
‘hearing’?
AHearing is definitely the
biggest challenge. If there is
just one person in the room you
can use voice recognition
software, but of course that
person needs to speak clearly and
slowly. If more than one person is
involved though the recognition
software becomes confused, it
cannot separate the voices.
Siri for iPhone is a very
good example of this; it never
works with background noise
especially if you have an accent.
This is made worse by the fact
that in Japan it is very difficult
to be alone. In Japan, nobody
uses the Japanese version of
Siri, or even a Bluetooth headset
because of the noise pollution.
The next step is to train our
systems to understand the
human voice, whether that be
one or several. In order to have
one model, we need to have
one computer, for example
the android operating system.
We also need to scale down to
powerful microprocessors,
but this will take time,
maybe ten years or so.
QCurrently your androids
have upper body
movement but no locomotion.
What solution are you
developing to allow your
robots to walk?
AAt the moment my main
priority is my research and
now we are just focusing on the
human-likeness aspect of
humanoid robots. But we are
working with Honda, who have a
pretty good biped technology for
making robots walk, but that is
not really our role.
With more funding though,
we will be able to create a biped
android which is our next
challenge. The most important
mechanism associated with
walking are the actuators, and
although we’ve spent six years
developing the current ones we
still need more powerful ones.
QYour androids famously
need their own lorry to
transport them to
conferences. How are you
making your new models more
portable?
AWe have just changed the
policy of our mechanical
design, by adjusting the position
of the joints and slimming down
the number of actuators. Our
original design featured 60
actuators, our newest model
features only 12. Once we defined
the purpose of the android –
communication with human
beings – we could focus on the
areas that were most in need of
complex actuators, in this case
the facial muscles for dexterous
facial expression.
QHow are the different
systems – sight, sound,
movement – all networked
together?
AUnfortunately the human
network is actually a very
poor model. There are many
parts in the human brain and it is
a very powerful processor, but
the connections are not actually
that tight or dense. When you are
walking, you do not know which
muscle is moving, your brain is
just telling your body
subconsciously how to move.
QYour robots are famously
modelled on people that
you know or admire. Where do
you take inspiration for the
design?
AMy first android was
modelled on my daughter.
Because I am a scientist it is very
important for me to have a reason
for my work. When I began my
daughter’s copy most research
into humanoid robotics was
based on scaled-down versions of
a human being, I wanted to
compare the same size. I could
not make this comparison with
just any child, so I chose my
daughter. The second female
android was intended for use in
an exhibition, so the choice of
model was quite difficult. So I
chose a Japanese newscaster,
someone who appears on TV
every day and is watched by
many people. She is almost like a
product of her TV show, a
well-known brand.
QYou have famously
created a robot in your
own image. What effect did
this have on you when you
interacted with it?
AIt was like meeting my twin
brother. But what’s strange
is that the human body does not
know its own face. Nobody knows
their own face.
QHow important is it that
future robots are built in
a human likeness?
AIt depends on the situation.
We will have more choices;
we will use many types of robot.
When that robot is an interface
between a human and a computer
that is when then they should be
in a human likeness. The brain
has a function; to recognise a
human shape. The world at the
moment is geared towards the
physical shape of a human, with
two legs and two arms, which
need specially purposed
machines. Any situation where
human eyes, speech and body are
needed is where a humanoid
robot will be used – where there
is an information exchange; a
guide; newscasters – which is a
pretty wide scope.
QIsn’t there a danger that a
robot that looks very
humanlike may cause human
beings to project an unfair
expectation that it can operate
exactly as a human does?
AAccording to a human
situation we can design
human behaviour, but I don’t
think it’s fair to put those kinds
of expectations on a robot, or
even appropriate. For example, a
human being is capable of
dancing. You can dance, I can
dance, shall we dance now?
No, not here or now, because it is
not the right situation. It is the
same with robots; they will not
be able to do everything that a
human being is capable of doing
because it will not always be
appropriate or relevant.
QYou have been quoted as
saying that android
robotics could become the
ideal partner for a human.
AAll of my staff have formed
a relationship with and
become very attached to the
androids they have been
developing, as they can touch her
in a way that they cannot touch
other human beings, almost like
a lover. But of course the
difference is that physically she
is often more attractive than
their girlfriend or boyfriend. She
is like the ideal wife. *
Hiroshi Ishiguro’s goal is
to see a human ‘believably
affectionate’ towards a
robot companion