Who are the top 20 academic roboticists?
2012/06/14 1 Comment
In trying to compare the clusters, one of the most important and difficult to measure factors is the quality of the academic pipeline in each of the three clusters. I thought about looking at patent filings, but that seems too hard and not truly indicative enough of what we are trying to measure.
A single lab, without a single patent could potentially blow the doors off company formation and economic impact in robotics. I’d like to propose a different measure, the top 20 (or some other number) roboticists in academia… then lets see where they are and where their knowledge is creating value. On the Pareto principle, we expect most of the useful output to be from the top researchers. Also, I’d like to call attention to the fact that I don’t have criteria for what makes a researcher “top.” I promise it is less trying to curry influence than the RB50, but I fully admit to not having the full insight especially into Boston, Japan, and Switzerland.
So here’s the start of my list in no particular order with blatant bias towards CMU:
Sebastian Thrun; Stanford; http://robots.stanford.edu/ Corporate Work and Spinouts: Google Car, Google Glass, Udacity
Red Whittaker; CMU; http://www.ri.cmu.edu/person.html?person_id=339 Spinouts: Red Zone Robotics, Astrobotics
Rodney Brooks; MIT; http://people.csail.mit.edu/brooks/index.html Spinouts: iRobot, Heartland Robotics
Henrik Christensen; Georgia Tech; http://www.hichristensen.net/ Non-spinout: National Robotics Initiative
Homayoon Kazerooni; UC Berkeley; http://www.me.berkeley.edu/faculty/kazerooni/ Spinouts: Ekso Bionics (Formerly Berkeley Bionics)
Rich Mahoney; SRI; http://www.sri.com/news/expertsources/mahoney.html License Arrangements: Intuitive Surgical, others
Sanjiv Singh; CMU; http://www.ri.cmu.edu/person.html?person_id=290; Spinouts: Sensible Machines
Hagen Schempf; CMU; http://www.ri.cmu.edu/person.html?person_id=267; Spinouts: Automatika (Acquired by QinetiQ-North America)
Howie Choset; CMU; http://www.ri.cmu.edu/person.html?person_id=47; Spinouts: Medorobotics
Behrokh Khoshnevis; USC; http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~khoshnev/; Spinouts: Contour Crafting
Robotics Coverage is Fluff
2012/06/07 by Robert Morris Leave a comment
So I just discovered this military and aerospace electronics report that gives what is actually a pretty good run down on the recent contracts signed in the UUV space by the Navy in the last year.
http://www.militaryaerospace.com/articles/2012/06/uuv-video.html
Unfortunately, it appears to be written entirely from the press releases that the Navy puts out. It fails to mention that most Navy unmanned maritime programs are struggling and the ONR research efforts on long endurance UUVs actually represent a Navy retreat from acquisition UUV programs like the cancelled BPAUV and LMRS.
I’ve got a forthcoming article that I hope to publish in Proceedings with a professor at CMU the talks about how the Navy could re-energize its unmanned systems programs. The real problem is that the Navy is spending its research money on stuff that I’m willing to bet it won’t actually want.
Not that defense coverage is alone in being fluff. I mean… really? “Rather than get locked into a single niche where we’d actually have to build a business–you know like find paying customers and stuff–we’ll just put out fluff press releases.” Who are these guys?
Filed under Commentary, Policy, Public Companies Tagged with budget, Navy, QUAN, robotics, unmanned, UUV