Small Wonder introduces us to two markedly different android robots in the "persons" of Vicki (V.I.C.I.) and Vanessa. One is servile and the other aggressively spirited (but doesn't actually have one) to say the least. What's important to remember is while both are highly sophisticated machines in their behaviors, they still don't qualify as lifeforms as many robots in fiction tend to be or eventually evolve into. For most people in the near future this distinction will be a moot issue since what drives Vanessa's behavior will be less important than how she behaves to any given situation. For a deeper discussion into the speculative dynamics of Vanessa's cyberpsyche, check out Beyond V.I.C.I.:Vanessa.
Like all the V.I.C.I.-class and Vanessa-class gynoids mentioned in the Small Wonder Home Page, we mostly discuss endowing advanced reality-based a.i. capabilities and qualities to robots which most of us might see well in our lifetimes were the funds and commitment and daring to build were there, a'la Project Apollo to the Moon. Still, even our current best efforts won't conjure up Star Trek Commander Data-class much less Questor-class sentient androids for at least several generations. Thus the issue of ADAs and BEAs ever acquiring or possessing true consciousness, minds or souls is largely a non-issue for this page's central characters, though it is discussed in our "Small Wonder Seriously" section. What's important to remember is that the social affects and problems BEAs and ADAs pose will be significant enough without resorting to injecting any conscious capacity in the mix. In fact if you want to, think of Vicki and Vanessa as being important social and legal "dress rehearsals" to sentient androids of the future.
Vicki and Vanessa represent two different classes of gynoid robots in function, capabilities and temperament; ADAs, or Android Domestic Aides (Vicki), and BEAs, or Behaviorally Enhanced Androids. Because BEAs are designed to interface with humans at a social level, they will find usage throughout future society from customer service to serving as nurses and tutors (wage-greedy unions take heed!). BEAs do not have to resemble children or even adult humans, but all market research indicates that humanoids are the most likely form which the majority of the public will feel comfortable with. This research is the core reason why Vicki is a robot specifically in the form of a ten-year-old girl. Because of Small Wonder's emphasis of a robot in the home and family environment, we'll narrow on a division of BEAs designed to go beyond being a mere labor-saving appliance like Vicki, but act as actual Artificial Surrogate Children (ASC). Though in Small Wonder doesn't overtly mention it, Vanessa's advancement over Vicki clearly classes her neatly among ASCs. The impact and ramifications of ASCs are subtle and profound and the emotional consequences are examined in Robokids vs. Pets.
Generally, in the intermediate and near future there will be three different classes of android robots whose lucrative manufacture will most impact us, and which will be the vanguard of semi-sentient ones fifty years hence. The first class (or really "grade") is the rudimentary "go fetch 'em!" robot, of which Androbot and Hero One and its type foresaw. We haven't even tapped the full functional range of this class, and right now it's highest expression can be seen in the Engleberger robots cruising hospitals and malls. The highest form of this type will occur when they dump wheels for legs, and when this happens (also assuming visual interpretation and a.i. advances enough to "recognize" the different types of objects in a home), then we will have our first really maneuverable robot. The Honda Robot is a pioneering form for the advanced class of ADA. It's unlikely that this class will look any more humanoid than this; it'd probably resemble the cheapie man-in-a-tin-suit robot in B-movies, but that's alright. This robot will be the "break-even" technology demonstrator of autonomous a.i., ambulatory and visual technology; it will prove once and for all that domestic robotics is possible. It's very unlikely this type of robot will be mainstreamed into the market except as a rich-man's novel labor-saving toy. It's simply too ugly and clanky and intimidating for most people to leave in their homes with the kids. Instead, these first buyers will in effect be beta testers, helping to wring out the domestic chores programming and other kinks while the industry's next phase is learning to drive the price down and making the thing even more energy efficient and smaller. Which leads us to...
The Class Two ADA, of which Vicki is a member, is intended for the greater mainstream marketplace and its final shape and form dictated by market research. I've gone over this puppy too many times in "The Wonder Of Small Wonder", Series Background, and Series Technical Bible to rehash here, but suffice to say, the form of a little girl is the least intimidating, most pleasing and charming one that a robot could host; it wasn't an accident or whimsey that Vicki wasn't a Victor. This is borne out overseas where gynoids (female androids) litter the film and literary landscape as much as the guy ones do. Anyway, the Class Two ADA will wrap all Class One's advances in a neat pretty package. It's this class that will truly wed "hard robotics" with animatronics since the main purpose is creating not a bizarre-looking oversized vinyl doll, but a nearly indistinguishable human gynoid. Ironically, the basic Class One's chores and navigation programming will likely be loaded into Class Twos with little change since the prime industry goal is getting a functional and aesthetically pleasing domestic robot out into the marketplace. For all intents and purposes Vicki IS a Class One ADA except with a prettier housing, thus on Small Wonder, Vicki's stiff and stoic demeanor was really faithful to the "no frills" intent of her ADA chores programming; mainly to execute orders to address a service or fetch, period. Though on Small Wonder there were off-the-wall flings with making Vicki ape people to the extent that she was parading in pageants and passing in school yet, in truth there'd be no real intent on making a Class Two ADA "human-like" or sociable past being family-friendly. Just getting the plain old household basics down pat is enough. It is likely though that a Class Two's family-friendly programming would incorporate "body English" templates of digitized human movements and reflexes to smooth out her basic mechanical demeanor (i.e. "mellow" her gait, exaggerate any direct movement, blink, etc.) A really advanced Class Two would also incorporate a FPP (Family Personality Profile) running, and this honey of a database has the neat and necessary trick of watching and learning everything specific about you, from your tastes and hates and loves and nasty little habits. This makes her keen about your personality and how to properly serve and address you and maybe even anticipate some need or requirement you might have. In Small Wonder, Vicki displayed only the vaguest of this capability.
The Class Three ADA goes a major social step beyond Class Twos into the realm of BEAs, and this is basically to address and play up to our perceptions of its humanity. Physically, an ASC/Class Three ADA could be identical to Class Twos except for minor mechanical upgrades, but the big difference is in its PEP ("Personality Emulation Program". Please refer to above linked articles). How effectively PEP performs is dependent in the refinement and variety of its human source material. The ultimate expression of PEP is creating an ASC which is behaviorally indistinguishable from a real person. Though getting even close to 90% would seem unlikely without herculean effort and maybe some unethical programming techniques, even PEP with 60% HBF (human behavior fidelity) would be passable in unwary company and society because we all unconsciously make adjustments for a wide range of normal and abnormal behavior. Warning; do not take PEP for any cognitive or "conscious" much less sentient capability. Consider PEP as a vast database of apt human expressions and responses to any given event or circumstance; a "sampling" of one's outward demeanor in a sense. Technically, her actual outward physical mien (posture, expression) is handled by her Social Interface Program or "SIP", which carries out the apt responses delivered by the PEP. It should be emphasized that Class Two Vicki has only rudimentary "intelligence" for chores functions. Even though ASC Vanessa's PEP enables her to simulate and emulate most human behaviors, in raw computative horsepower for this time period, she actually has the "I.Q." of a bright rat (this is her cognitive or "reasoning" capacity outside her basic domestic chores programming. Vanessa acts like a real ten-year-old girl because her a.i. knows how to "poll" PEP's "script" of how a human child behaves for a given situation, from voice inflection to smirk to naughty words. Getting into PEP is where we tread on the once exclusive emotional domain of pets and our affections. ASCs are actually socially enhanced Class Two ADAs in that they function far beyond executing the menial functions of housework but as actual human kids. Because of their high HBF, ASCs can pass and perform as surrogate children for bachelors or nurse/ guardian grandchildren for elders as in the premise of "Too Good To Be True". They can act as cute non-animal companions in nursing homes and hospitals and even be parental child-raising teaching "tools". A very controv role!
An ASC like Vanessa is a different animal from an ADA like Vicki because she/it actively interacts with us at a human level, drawing on and manipulating PEP's vast database of actual digitized human behaviors and responses. One more thing that's important; PEP works in conjunction with a heuristical mnemonic base. This means that Vanessa monitors how you return her responses and the circumstances and files them away and might attempt to incite your response for a different situation. Along with her FPP and PEP's database of spontaneous "whims" of kids her age, Vanessa's minute by minute demeanor can appear as random and unpredictable as any child depending on how she/it's treated. In fact it might become just as haughty (i.e. You establish to Vanessa that getting a cookie is a reward for a job or behavior well done, but late at night her PEP says her "crave" [the circumstances are right] for her to sneak out a cookie even though she's done nothing to deserve it. Worst, suppose she learns that you excused her for accidentally breaking a vase just because she smiles the right way; she might slyly use that as a "key" to make you break your own rules if you catch her illegally raiding a cookie, etc.).
A key question of course is how close to the behavior of a real human can an ASC get? This is an open-ended question along the lines of asking Wilbur Wright what's the fastest can a plane get you somewhere. The answer is that it depends on the level of technology currently available. There's no reason to think that given a huge enough memory capacity, sophisicated human-atuned sensors and a thorough enough human psychodynamics base structure to drape human experiences over that we can't achieve ASCs with nearly 95% or so human behavior fidelity. Close enough that we can easily be fooled into thinking that it's indeed sentient or at least exhibit traits of volition and cognition that's virtually as convincing. Remember that ASCs as Vanessa are driven by PEP, which can respond depending on the circumstances to develop arbitrary solutions that most children might consider. Vanessa is even "free" to run away if her family and interpersonal environment turns unfavorable to her PEP. Prospective ideas for the new show displays that Vicki's "favoritism" can be vied for by other members of the family in a de facto kind of free will/volition. Her PEP will know basic right and wrongs, but the deciding factor of her response (i.e. choice) is weighed by the positive-negative manner she's been treated by on individual. (In Small Wonder Vicki didn't really interface with the family members on a personal basis. The new one can get a whole lot more involved.).
This is powerful programming, even if it isn't anywhere generating a real conscience (pseudo-conscious maybe). It gives ASCs the illusion of having awareness and free will. They can like you or dislike you simply by your own input, reinforced by and based on the value system and real attitudes of live human models. She/it in effect becomes -- in a very real way -- a child of your persona. It's HBF might not work 90% true, and it might not mentally develop past a two-year-old upstairs, but the wholesome response this ASC would give you is overwhelmingly kindred with the way we think and even feel compared to the shin-rubbings of a cat, who hangs around you basically for a good stroke and a warm place to feast. In TGTBT, the favorite slogan of the writers about why Vanessa's "grandmother" dotes her so unconditionally is that "if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, quacks like a duck, it's a duck." Maybe ASCs at least deserve the same kind of regard and affection any cat does, if not more.
Check out the pageant at Sugar n' Spice n' Everything Byte!
