Creativity, dreams and mobile robots

Dennis Hong (RoMeLa, Virginia Tech) in his TedxNASA talk in September 2009 talked about biologically inspired tripedal robots, smart wall climber robots, cheap hydraulic arms, anthropomorphic football player humanoids, and even an unmemorably named artificial amoeba that is capable of chemically induced locomotion. His imagination of designing such autonomous mobile robots is not limited by the fact that very few of these exact motions exist in nature (i.e., take his 3-legged STriDER for example).

However for a cognitive psychologist, the really cool stuff is not these futuristic technological solutions, but Hong’s self-explanation about the source of his creative thinking when around 11:55 he asks himself a question: “Where do we come up with these ideas?”

He identified 5 sources of creativity:

  1. Dreams

Inspiration from one’s own dreams is what he calls out first. Every social scientist should be relieved that finally a real computer scientist dares to talk about the necessity of such soft human processes as dreams in the process of creative thinking. At nights when Hong goes to bed and about to fall asleep, he jots down on a paper notepad his wildest ideas (“..I scribble everything down and draw things before I go to bed”, 12:53). The next morning, he deciphers the ideas. Most days, there’s nothing on the page or nothing interesting, but occasionally he has something that he call a “Eureka moment”. When it happens, he logs these ideas carefully on his computer. What happens to these Eureka-ideas? Hong uses them to write RFPs (Request for Proposals) for his future research projects. In other words, he already has some answers for upcoming research questions and doesn’t have to wait for the inspirations to come.

2. Collaborations

Dreams on a group level could be called brainstorming sessions. Since individual ideas are not enough, Hong and his group have group brainstorming sessions. To facilitate discussion and make sure that students don’t feel intimidated, the golden rule is that nobody can criticize the other person’s ideas. All sorts of wacky ideas fly around, just like in one’s dreams. Once these ideas are recorded, people can decide which idea to pursue.

3. Education

Does school education really kill creativity? The fact is that to challenge the grand questions of science, you need tools. These tools are maths, physics, linear algebra, biology, etc. (neuroscience and philosophy are my additions to this list). While schools may not promote creativity per se, they provide the essential basis for students.

4. Work hard

The really good indicator of a creative and productive researcher labs – according to Hong – is that students and researchers are working on their ideas 3am in the morning. Not because they have to, but because they enjoy it.

5. Play hard

Finally, he admits that having lots of fun is the key. No need to explain this to anyone who has ever felt the joyous moment of a research Eureka-moment in their life before…

GPS truth to be revealed

Unlike most of the blogsphere today, I’m not going to come up with another witty joke about how poor Apple’s name choice was for the iPad. Instead, let’s focus on a recent news about a research initiative to investigate the “the impacts of sat navs on spatial attention and memory while undertaking a complex task such as driving” (Agarwal quoted by The Press Association).

These researchers in the UK look into one of my favourite topics of human navigation: the dynamic balance between learning about and acting upon our spatial environment. When visiting a new city or driving on unfamiliar roads, our brain takes up information in a distinctively different fashion than when we travel the same well-known route to our parents’ house as we have done thousands of times since our childhood (literally, different neural formations and pathways are activated in our brain, see Hartley et al., 2003).

Exploring new side streets versus steering towards familiar neighbourhoods, either consciously or not, is a choice that we make every time we travel. The analysis of the patterns in which human explorers make these choices show that in addition to the obvious constraints of the environment (e.g., availability of alternative roads), people also have a personal preference of how they like to get to their destinations (Makany, 2009). Some of us prefer the shortest routes, while others are more adventurous types. This diversity of individual navigation choices creates beautiful complexity for social mobility patterns (Gonzales et al., 2008).

What is it have to do with GPS and sat navs? Most of these technologies eliminate this ‘personal touch’ from our travels. It offers the most optimal routes, shortest time, distance, avoiding traffic, toll-ways, etc. So far, however, I have not seen an optimization algorithm that implements the real human factor in spatial navigation. Such system should analyze route choices previously taken by the driver and determine what kind of route plan will be not only the most economic but also the most satisfactory. I keep my fingers crossed that Agarwal and her colleagues will have this previously ignored human perspective included in their new research initiative.

Public library spatial design

A very exciting new spatial research project is on the horizon. I’ve got connected to an open-minded and research oriented architect at a firm in South San Francisco, who are just about to begin a public library redesigning project in early 2010. After initial talks, we agreed that I will assist in their assessment of the existing and desired spatial layout and research into identifying user (‘patron’ in library language) wayfinding needs. I’m very excited for some of my navigation analysis methods to be applied to this particular real world design project, and I anticipate to gain insightful results from this research.

The literature for library spatial research is surprisingly enormous (ACRL/LLAMA Guide; Crumpton & Crowe, 2008; Saanwald, 2008; WBDG Guide). More specifically to public library designs, I found academic works that explain in great depth how important appropriate spatial cognition and wayfinding planning would be (Beecher, 2004; Jones, 2000; Galan-Diaz, in press).

Interestingly though, previous real world architectural projects involving public library design have seldom mention any systematic attempt to empirically understand how patrons use the space. They are focused on the details of the physical properties (i.e., colour, shape, configuration) and mission statements of the library or the assumed (not actually measured) interest of the patrons.

Although my research has just began, I’m already seeing important research leads and potentially crucial questions:

  1. How/why/when do patrons use the space of existing library?
  2. What areas (and why) have higher visitation frequencies than others? Why?
  3. What are the problematic spatial areas (ie., high need with low visitation)? (And what areas don’t need re-design!)
  4. How to install/reinforce new and desired services for patrons?

More to come soon…

Spatial Strategies book now available at Amazon.com

My book Spatial Strategies (2009, VDM Verlag) is now available online by Amazon.com. It is primarily written for researchers interested in spatial cognition. This is a book based on my PhD research and it presents 5 interesting experiments about how people explore and navigate in physical/virtual/web environments. It also describes a classification algorithm to identify strategies of optimizing between learning and travelling about novel environments.

Direct link: http://amzn.com/3639189930

Spatial Strategies: Optimizations between spatial learning and travelling
by Tamas Makany

In Stock
Price: $65.14

Add to cart
Add to Wish List