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.

Strategic Task Decomposition in Joint Action

The core of human cooperation is people's ability to perform joint actions. Frequently, this requires effectively decomposing a joint task into individual subtasks, for example, when jointly shopping at the market to buy food. Surprisingly, little is known about how collaborators balance the costs of establishing a joint strategy for such decompositions and its expected benefits for a joint goal. We created a new online task that required pairs of randomly matched participants to jointly collect colored items. We then systematically varied the cognitive costs and benefits of applying a color-splitting strategy. The results showed that pairs adopted a color-splitting strategy more often when necessary to lower cognitive costs. However, once the strategy was jointly adopted, it continued to be used even when the cost-benefits changed. Our results provide first insights on how people decompose joint tasks into individual components and how decomposition strategies may evolve into conventions.

Haptic communication optimises joint decisions and affords implicit confidence sharing

Group decisions can outperform the choices of the best individual group members. Previous research suggested that optimal group decisions require individuals to communicate explicitly (e.g., verbally) their confidence levels. Our study addresses the untested hypothesis that implicit communication using a sensorimotor channel—haptic coupling—may afford optimal group decisions, too. We report that haptically coupled dyads solve a perceptual discrimination task more accurately than their best individual members; and five times faster than dyads using explicit communication. Furthermore, our computational analyses indicate that the haptic channel affords implicit confidence sharing. We found that dyads take leadership over the choice and communicate their confidence in it by modulating both the timing and the force of their movements. Our findings may pave the way to negotiation technologies using fast sensorimotor communication to solve problems in groups.

Informing, Coordinating, and Performing: A Perspective on Functions of Sensorimotor Communication

Sensorimotor communication is a form of communication instantiated through body movements that are guided by both instrumental, goal-directed intentions and communicative, social intentions. Depending on the social interaction context, sensorimotor communication can serve different functions. This article aims to disentangle three of these functions: (a) an informing function of body movements, to highlight action intentions for an observer; (b) a coordinating function of body movements, to facilitate real-time action prediction in joint action; and (c) a performing function of body movements, to elicit emotional or aesthetic experiences in an audience. We provide examples of research addressing these different functions as well as some influencing factors, relating to individual differences, task characteristics, and situational demands. The article concludes by discussing the benefits of a closer dialog between separate lines of research on sensorimotor communication across different social contexts.