Note: I am also writing a problem statement, both as an example and to contribute my viewpoints.  I hope we can consider these equally as possible goals.

– Garth

Central Questions

The fundamental premise of this course is synthetic: can we find new techniques for creating evocative performances using machine automation? Our working definition of a robot as a ‘surprisingly animate’ machine starts from a performative premise, but deeply engaging an audience requires a sustained suspension of disbelief. This goes beyond investment in the story to accepting that the machine can be an object for empathy or disdain.

This is a broad problem, and so I am proposing three focus areas covering artistic, performative, and technical goals.

Artistic objective: tell the story of searching for stillness. The machine is moving toward the moment when it can come to rest. Just as silence is the counterpoint to music, reaching stillness without immobility is the counterpoint to movement. As a narrative goal, it touches on the search for peace, understanding death, and the ambiguous relationships between the machine and its surroundings.

Performative objective: conveying a meaningful pause requires developing a kinetic language of movement which creates a space in which the pause can occur. The movement of the machine must stem from its physical form in such a way that the viewer can infer the logic.

Technical objective: until we understand how these goals can be translated into objective criteria, human skill will be needed to guide the expression. However, including some degree of autonomy supports the performance goals by creating believability. The technical challenge is developing shared autonomy for performance control such that the human and automation can split the performance task.

Creative Constraints

The technical objective can be minimally satisfied by requiring the controller to have at least two modes: fully automatic performance and augmented teleoperation.

The performative objective does not require an overly complex machine, so each character may be limited to no more than three actuated freedoms. Mobility is possible but constrained by a tether.

The artistic objective may require a differentiation between central and secondary characters. A reasonable limit is no more than two central characters, with secondary characters and automation of visibly simpler form.

Limitation of Scope

Given that the focus is entirely on the movement of one or more central characters, the secondary characters, scenic automation, lighting, and optional sound score may be controlled using a pre-scored timeline.

Measures of Success

The primary measures are qualitative:

  1. Does the audience opinion reflect an understanding of the dramatic intent?
  2. Does the audience perceive a potential for variation or failure in the machine performance?
  3. Does the audience believe a satisfying climax and conclusion was reached?

Technical measures and milestones:

  1. Does the fully-automatic mode produce a visible performance?
  2. Did the show proceed on time from beginning to end?
  3. How many unexpected deviations from the script occurred?
  4. How many times did the audience laugh?
  5. How many times did the audience gasp or titter?