Social Contribution in the Design of Adaptive Machines on the Web

The Web has created new opportunities for interactive problem solving and design by large groups. In the context of robotics, we have shown recently that a crowd of non-experts are capable of designing adaptive machines over the Web. However, determining the degree to which collective contribution plays a part in these tasks requires further investigation. We hypothesize that there exist subtle yet measurable social dynamics that occur during the collaborative design of robots on the Web. To test this, we enabled a crowd to rapidly design and train simulated, web-embedded robots. We compared the robots designed by a socially-interacting group of individuals to another group whose members were isolated from one another. We found that there exists a latent quality in the robots designed by the social group that was significantly less prevalent in the robots designed by individuals working alone. Thus, there must exist synergies in the former group that facilitate this design task. We also show that this latent quantity correlates with the desired design outcome, which was fast forward locomotion. However, the quantity when distilled into its component parts is not more prevalent in one group than another. This finding demonstrates that there are indeed traces left behind in the machines designed by the crowd that betray the social dynamics that gave rise to them. Demonstrating the existence of such quantities and the methodology for extracting them presents opportunities for crafting interfaces to magnify these synergies and thus improve collective design of robots over the web in particular, and crowd design activities in general.

[1]  David Baker,et al.  Algorithm discovery by protein folding game players , 2011, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[2]  I. Couzin Collective minds , 2007, Nature.

[3]  Robin I. M. Dunbar Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates , 1992 .

[4]  J. Eichel Victims Of Groupthink A Psychological Study Of Foreign Policy Decisions And Fiascoes , 2016 .

[5]  Josh Bongard,et al.  Participation and Contribution in Crowdsourced Surveys , 2015, PloS one.

[6]  T. Gowers,et al.  Massively collaborative mathematics , 2009, Nature.

[7]  Alessandro Vespignani,et al.  Modeling Users' Activity on Twitter Networks: Validation of Dunbar's Number , 2011, PloS one.

[8]  W. Heath The Difference: How the Power of Diversity Creates Better Groups, Firms, Schools, and Societies , 2008 .

[9]  Josh C. Bongard,et al.  Crowdseeding: A Novel Approach for Designing Bioinspired Machines , 2015, Living Machines.

[10]  John P. Robinson,et al.  Social Implications of the Internet , 2001 .

[11]  Josh C. Bongard,et al.  Combining Computational and Social Effort for Collaborative Problem Solving , 2015, PloS one.

[12]  François Bry,et al.  Human computation , 2018, it Inf. Technol..

[13]  Philip K. McKinley,et al.  Evolutionary Robotics on the Web with WebGL and Javascript , 2014, ArXiv.

[14]  Wenji Mao,et al.  Social Computing: From Social Informatics to Social Intelligence , 2007, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[15]  Andrew B. Whinston,et al.  Social Computing: An Overview , 2007, Commun. Assoc. Inf. Syst..

[16]  Chandana Paul,et al.  Investigating Morphological Symmetry and Locomotive Efficiency using Virtual Embodied Evolution , 2000 .

[17]  Joshua Bongard,et al.  Collective Design of Robot Locomotion , 2014, ALIFE.

[18]  C. Lintott,et al.  Galaxy Zoo: morphologies derived from visual inspection of galaxies from the Sloan Digital Sky Survey , 2008, 0804.4483.

[19]  Benjamin B. Bederson,et al.  Human computation: a survey and taxonomy of a growing field , 2011, CHI.