重审伯克利与海斯曼的机器智能思想，揭示其对具身智能架构的早期洞察。
Berkeley and Heiserman as an Unexhausted Architecture for Embodied Machine Intelligence
- 将伯克利视为具身机器智能的早期理论家，强调感知、状态、控制与行动的协同
- 发现伯克利与海斯曼共享一套以感知-状态-控制-行动为核心的描述框架
- 批判当前大模型机器人缺乏对行为持续性与经验修正的明确设计
爱德蒙·C·伯克利常被视作符号逻辑与早期计算之间的中介人物，但这一常规认知低估了其工作广度。本文主张：伯克利更应被视为具身机器智能的早期理论家。在其关于符号逻辑、机器智能、活体机器人及Squee的核心著作中，智能并非单纯的符号操作，而是物理实现机器中感知、存储、计算、控制、状态与行动的有序协调。本文第一贡献为阐释性：重构伯克利作为机器架构、延时行为与环境耦合控制的思想家形象。第二贡献为比较性：将其与戴维·L·海斯曼并置，恢复二者共享的描述框架——聚焦于感知、状态/记忆、控制、行动与适应。第三贡献为批判性：运用该框架评估当代具身人工智能话语。核心论点是，当前以大语言模型为中心的机器人系统虽展现强大能力，却缺乏对行为持久性、可恢复性、维护性以及通过经验进行结构化修正的同等清晰表达。
原文摘要 · Abstract (English)
Edmund C. Berkeley is usually remembered as a mediator between symbolic logic and early computing, yet that standard description understates the scope of his work. This paper argues for a stronger reading: Berkeley should also be understood as an early theorist of embodied machine intelligence. Across Berkeley's major writings on symbolic logic, machine intelligence, living robots, and Squee, intelligence appears not as disembodied symbol manipulation alone but as the organized coordination of sensing, storage, calculation, control, state, and action in physically realized machines. The paper's first contribution is interpretive: it reconstructs Berkeley as a thinker of machine architecture, temporally extended behavior, and environment-coupled control. Its second contribution is comparative: it reads Berkeley alongside David L. Heiserman to recover a shared descriptive scheme centered on sensing, state or memory, control, action, and adaptation. Its third contribution is critical: it uses that scheme to assess current embodied-AI discourse. The broader claim is that contemporary LLM-centered robotics often demonstrates impressive capability without an equally explicit account of persistence, recoverability, maintenance, and structured modification of conduct through experience.
Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品；中文卡片由大模型生成，请以原文为准。