Challenge 2 Call 3 presentation to NCPs Brussels, December 13, 2007

1. Challenge 2 Call 3presentation to NCPsBrussels, December 13, 2007 Colette Maloney, PhD Head of Unit, INFSO E5, Cognitive Systems and Robotics European Commission

2. Challenge 2: Cognitive Systems, Robotics, InteractionBackdrop • the proliferation of sensors in IT applications (robots, computer vision, speech recognition) and their deployment in ‘real-world’ settings; • the consequent requirement that information processing be capable of dealing with uncertainty (in the form of unexpected events, diverse contexts, novel situations, etc) inherent in sensory data;

3. Target a (IPs, STREPs) 3 areas: focus on one

4. Robots …… in real world settings less-constrained environments can be too nuanced, too complicated and too unpredictable to be summarised within a limited set of specifications there will inevitably be novel situations and the system will have gaps, conflicts or ambiguities in its own knowledge and capabilities

5. robots handling different objects and operating autonomously or in cooperation with people may call for manipulation & grasping, navigation, locomotion, obstacle avoidance, interaction with humans,…

6. Monitoring and controlling…eg using computer vision traffic monitoring other applications intelligent surveillance, biometric recognition, exploration, data-gathering manufacturing, robotics,…

7. robots or other systems monitoring & controlling material or informational processes May call for: detection, recognition, classification …. of objects, events or processes,…

8. the majority of mobile phones have voice dialling software for dictating documents on your PC is available in most computer stores Interactive Voice Response (IVR) systems are becoming commonplace for handling telephone enquiries … technology is fragile in ‘real’ conditions From Roger K. Moore Spoken Language Processing for Artificial Cognitive Systems, IST 2006 Multimodal Interfaces …eg in speech recognition improvements have come from increases in computing power

9. multimodal interfaces &/or interpersonal communication systems understanding language, gestures, etc may call for a deep understanding of human physical & cognitive capabilities, communication needs & contextual constraints,…

10. A new systems engineering paradigm? • as systems get more complex, the growth in utility and productivity is in ever smaller proportion to the growth in compute power afforded by Moore’s Law • cognition: a way of overcoming uncertainty accompanying interaction in a world that is not completely pre-specified • goal: engineering principlesfor robust, versatile systems

11. A key question How should systems pertaining to these areas be designed and built so that they are more robust, flexible, effective, natural and where necessary or desirable, safer and more autonomous than what is possible today? but,… how can we specify what it means to be robust, flexible, etc?

12. Addressing the key question • while providing valid and viable answers to the previous key question, projects can take the approach of their choice, and draw on those scientific and engineering disciplines that are needed to achieve the its goals. • projects are requested to contribute to the development of criteria for benchmarkingsystem properties such as robustness, scalability and adaptability, make them public and compare with others don’t forget the emphasis, in particular in robotics, is on integration of complete systems

13. Project outcome • projects are expected to develop know-howneeded to create new products and to build systems that are desirable but cannot be built given our current know-how • emphasis is scientific and technological advance – not application development; • role of applications is to provide research questions and to demonstrate the impact of conceptual or technical innovation.

14. Challenges for research • a key issue is how systems should work – greatly improving robustness etc. requires rethinking the way systems are engineered • theories are needed - systems theories, software architectures, control theories, modelling theories, etc - that will allow us to build these types of systems • engineering progress will depend on advancing scientific understanding of what both natural and artificial systems can and cannot do, and how and why • integration of disciplines: robotics, artificial intelligence, computer vision, natural language, cognitive science, psychology,… mathematics,… philosophy

15. Target b (NoEs)

16. Network of excellence (NoE)- programmes of joint research & resource sharing which contribute to reinforcing & sustaining scientific excellence. Robotics: experimentation with industry strength platforms, benchmarking Cognitive Systems: integration of diverse research area, understanding of requirements for specific applications Language based communication and interaction: new approaches; understanding of capabilities required of technical systems

17. Target c (CSAs)

18. Coordination Action • Increased cooperation and coordination between EU Member States covering domain that contribute to overall goals of Challenge 2.

19. Some myths • European level – does not mean having a spread of partners from countries all over Europe. It means cross-border collaboration that promises to achieve more than could have been achieved within one single Member State • Industrial participation - is not a requirement. It is an option • Presence of one or more SMEs - is not to be taken as a must or as a de facto plus point. SMEs are treated just as any other partner in a consortium in terms of having a necessary competence, a reputation and a clearly defined role • Projects - incl. IPs - need not assemble large numbers of partners. Projects should only include those partners needed to achieve the goals and no more.

20. More myths • Management by a professional consultancy – is not to be taken for granted. It must offer a proven added-value. • We are not looking for ideas for new applications systems or products. Advances should be related to the engineering goals of Challenge 2 – not to health, security, ambient intelligence,….(those such domains can provide useful demonstration scenarios) • We are not looking for ‘contributions’ to any policy except research policy. And the part of research policy in question is Challenge 2 - not enlargement policy, SME policy, Information Society policy (i2010), other Community policies*…. *often cited wrongly or misunderstood

21. Cognitive Systems, Interaction, Robotics: 2007-08 Links More (documents, project descriptions, presentations,…) at • http://www.cognitivesystems.eu See also • http://www.eucognition.org • http://www.roboticsplatform.com Contact • Colette.Maloney@ec.europa.eu

22. - END -