系列文章目录
文章目录
目录
unit8 Learning robot objectives from physical human interaction
unit6 Economic inequality
“Economic inequality” generally refers to the disparity of wealth or income between different groups or within a society. Often characterized by the aphorism “the rich get richer while the poor get poorer,” the phrase often refers more specifically to the gap in income or assets between the poorest and richest segments of an individual nation.
Even though the basic concept has entered the public consciousness, the effects of highly concentrated wealth are hotly debated and poorly understood by observers. Global trends have led to an increasing concentration of wealth in an increasingly small number of hands. A variety of explanations have been proposed to explain how inequality can work to stifle growth. A high level of economic inequality means a higher level of poverty. Poverty is associated with increased crime and poor public health, which places burdens on the economy. Wealthy citizens maintain disproportionate political power compared to poorer citizens, which encourages the development of inefficient tax structures skewed in favor of the wealthy. Unequal income distribution increases political instability, which threatens property rights, increases the risk of state repudiated contracts, and discourages capital accumulation. A widening rich-poor gap tends to increase the rate of rent-seeking and predatory market behaviors that hinder economic growth.
However, from researchers’ perspectives, the consequences of the rich-poor divide are exceedingly diverse. Some economists conclude that inequality is beneficial overall for stimulating growth, improves the quality of life for all members of a society, or is merely a necessary part of social progress. Other economists claim wealth concentrations create perpetually oppressed minorities, exploit disadvantaged populations, hinder economic growth, and lead to numerous social problems.
unit7 Exploring space
Space exploration is the investigation by means of crewed and uncrewed spacecraft. It is meant to reach the universe beyond Earth’s atmosphere and use the information to increase knowledge of the cosmos and benefit humanity.
With the development of rockets and the advances in electronics and other technologies in the 20th century, it became possible to send machines and animals and then people into outer space. Well before technology made these achievements possible, however, space exploration had already captured the minds of many people, not only aircraft pilots and scientists but also writers and artists. Thus, space travel has always had strong hold on the imagination of both professional astronauts and laypeople alike. As Tom Wolfe wrote, space travel is like to sit “on top of an enormous Roman candle, such as a Redstone, Atlas, Titan or Saturn rocket, and wait for someone to light the fuse.” It perhaps also explains why space exploration has been a common and enduring theme in literature and art. “One small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind” was taken by the human spirit many times and in many ways before Neil Armstrong stamped humankind’s first footprint on the Moon.
Although the possibility of exploring space has long excited people in many walks of life, for most of the latter 20th century and into the early 21st century, only national governments could afford the very high costs of launching people and machines into space. Governments realized the ability to observe Earth from space could provide significant benefits to the general public apart from security and military uses. The first application was the development of satellites assisting in weather forecasting. A second application involved remote observation. China, the U.S., Russia, and Europe, also developed their own satellite-based global positioning systems that could help in navigating from one point to another, and provide precise time signals.
unit8 Learning robot objectives from physical human interaction
Humans physically interact with each other every day—from grabbing someone’s hand when they are about to spill their drink, to giving your friend a nudge to steer them in the right direction. Physical interaction is an intuitive way to convey information about personal preferences and how to perform a task correctly.
So why aren’t we physically interacting with current robots the way we do with each other Seamless physical interaction between a human and a robot requires a lot: lightweight robot designs, reliable torque or force sensors, safe and reactive control schemes, the ability to predict the intentions of human collaborators, and more! Luckily, robotics has made many advances in the design of personal robots specifically developed with humans in mind.
However, consider the example from the beginning where you grab your friend’s hand as they are about to spill their drink. Instead of your friend who is spilling, imagine it was a robot. Because state-of-the-art robot planning and control algorithms typically assume human physical interventions are disturbances, once you let go of the robot, it will resume its erroneous trajectory and continue spilling the drink. The key to this gap comes from how robots reason about physical interaction: instead of thinking about why the human physically intervened and replanning in accordance with what the human wants, most robots simply resume their original behavior after the interaction ends.
We argue that robots should treat physical human interaction as useful information about how they should be doing the task. We formalize reacting to physical interaction as an objective or reward learning problem and propose a solution that enables robots to change their behaviors while they are performing a task according to the information gained during these interactions. This work is merely a step in exploring learning robot objectives. Many open questions remain including developing solutions that can handle dynamical aspects (like preferences about the timing of the motion) and how and when to generalize learned objectives to new tasks.
unit9 Driverless cars
As the relentless pace of technology continues to advance, companies must adapt or get left behind. One of the key areas of contention these days is the driverless car. Autonomous cars have long been featured in science fiction movies and books, but in recent years they have moved from a pipe dream to a reality.
The development of the autonomous car actually started in the 1920s, but it wasn’t until the 1980s that the first prototypes were successfully created, one of which was designed by Mercedes-Benz.
Since then the technology has gone from strength to strength and these days many companies are jumping on the bandwagon. Uber is the latest to announce its plan to unroll a fleet of driverless cars. It follows Apple and Ford, who have announced similar plans, and Google and Tesla, who already have autonomous cars on the road.
Two questions arise: Do we really need them? And are they really safe? Advocates of driverless cars would argue “yes” to both. Vehicular autonomy, if perfected, could lead to much safer road conditions for all, lower insurance costs and enhance mobility for the elderly, the sick and those with disabilities. They would also allow roads to increase their capacity between 200 to 400 percent.
Perfection, though, seems to be just out of reach at the moment. To date Google’s selfdriving car, launched in 2012, has had 14 minor accidents. Even worse, Tesla’s Autopilot has caused one fatality in 2015, where the vehicle simply did not see the obstacle.
While the technology exists, driverless cars and full vehicular autonomy is still embryonic.That said, you can rest assured that further development in the field is inevitable. And what’s the future? Well, George Marcus, co-founder of Geometric Intelligence—Uber’s autonomous development department—imagines a world of flying cars taking us to work. He says “They’re going to allow people to take long commutes at 75 or 150 mph where you’d otherwise get stuck in traffic. It’s really, in a not-too-distant future, going to be something that is practical.” Wouldn’t that be fine?
unit10 Animal behavior before natural disasters
Can animals sense disaster? Many people say yes. Researchers have seen abnormal animal behaviors shortly before approaching natural disasters. For example, just prior to the disastrous 2004 tsunami in Indonesia, people observed animals behaving oddly. There were reports of elephants suddenly moving toward higher ground. Flamingos, wild boars and other animals fled their usual habitats. Bats, normally seen only at night, were observed flying during the daytime. One man reported that his normally energetic dogs refused to take their daily walk on the beach. Before the Sichuan earthquake in China, there were similar reports of peculiar phenomena.
About three weeks before the earthquake, large amounts of water inexplicably vanished from a pond in Enshi in east-central China. Three days before the earthquake, thousands of toads roamed the streets of Mianzhu, which was among the hardest-hit by the quake. At a zoo more than 600 miles east of the epicenter, animals exhibited peculiar behavior just hours before the earthquake. Zebras banged their heads against a door. Elephants swung their trunks wildly. The lions and tigers, normally asleep at midday, were awake and pacing. Five minutes before the quake hit, dozens of peacocks started screeching.
Roger Musson, a seismologist, says there are several possible reasons for behavioral changes in animals before an earthquake. The most likely reason is that the movement of underground rocks before an earthquake generates an electrical signal. Some animals can perceive this signal. Another possibility is that animals can sense weak shocks prior to an earthquake that humans cannot pick up.
So why aren’t experts heeding nature’s disaster warnings? Some countries have sought to use changes in nature as an early warning sign. However, according to Musson, a reliable method has yet to be developed.
Part of the problem is that many factors cause animals to act strangely. People tend to be more aware of this abnormal behavior when it is followed by a major event such as an earthquake. But they may not take note of or remember unusual behavior when it is not followed by a disaster. Experts also explain that animals seem to have the ability to predict natural disasters, but point out that they don’t always do so. Before the 2004 tsunami in Indonesia, for example, not all elephants exhibited unusual behavior. Zhang Xiaodong, a researcher at the China Seismological Bureau, said his agency has used natural activity to predict earthquakes 20 times in the past 20 years. However, that still represents only a small proportion of China’s total earthquakes.
总结
以上是后五章的听力材料，欢迎大家交流，批评指正。
1万+
被折叠的 条评论
为什么被折叠?
到【灌水乐园】发言
