Jindřiška Deckerová: We’re still far from fully autonomous robots — but there are other causes for concern

Are there already drones that you would describe as reasonable?

It depends on your definition of “reasonable”. Many researchers are currently working on robots that can process external sensations and learn to make decisions based on how they are programmed. Intelligent robots do exist, but equating the term “intelligent” to examples from popular movies like I, Robot or Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy would be getting ahead of ourselves. Still, we’re the closest we have ever been – at Japanese technology fairs, for example, they’re presenting robots that can do incredible things. I’m a little afraid of fully autonomous robots. As a researcher, I know I don’t have to worry because we won’t have those for quite a while, but the technology is evolving fast.

Does your field have any clearly defined ethical positions regarding such topics?

The guiding principle for programmers and scientists is the prohibition of plagiarism. One must learn to cite sources properly. Then, within robotics, there is the principle that the “creator” should always be responsible for his invention – although that sounds like something from Frankenstein. The law of robotics, for example, states that a robot ought not to harm a human. And at the same time, there is a branch of so-called robot rights that advocates for legal protection of robots. 

There are plenty of opinions on these matters. I believe in the guiding ethical principle that robotics and artificial intelligence should not be used against humanity – on the contrary, technology should help people. But it is important to remember that it can be misused – for example, training computer vision and facial recognition systems to track people balances on the edge of good scientific ethics. Maybe it even falls beyond.

What rights do you think robots should have?

This is a similar dilemma to the debate on animal testing versus human testing. Everyone sees it a little differently.

What research would you personally not go into because of ethics?

Anything can be used for harmful purposes. Even the most well-meaning research work can be appropriated for nefarious purposes. But on the other hand, our research has the potential to help, for example, rescue workers who send robots to help where it would be dangerous to send people. Personally, I would be worried about research in the healthcare sector – such as programming robotic arms to take out appendixes. Something like that implies huge responsibility, just a millimetre off and it could be fatal. I wouldn’t dare to design robots in order to serve as police officers or psychologists, either. I believe there are still activities that should be kept for humans.

What motivated you to study artificial intelligence? Was it the robots in the books and films you mentioned?

I actually got into AI by accident when I needed a topic for my bachelor’s thesis. Professor Faigl had taught me programming during my undergraduate studies, and I came across him again at a fair where various labs were presenting possible topics for bachelor’s and master’s theses. Our lab was demonstrating walking robots and drones. I liked the way the robots moved, I thought I’d give it a try. And so I became a “robotics theorist” because I was more interested in theoretical problem-solving than in its practical application. And eventually it has led me to science and research. I really enjoy it.

Do you see any interest in studying artificial intelligence among Czech students?

Definitely, now AI is everywhere and a lot of people are interested in it, which is great. There’s more to AI than just robots and different neural networks – it’s also computer vision, where you need a lot more mathematics. There’s something for everyone. I also know a lot of people who prefer more practical aspects of computer science such as software development, and AI can be used there too. There are lots of possibilities.

What all does studying at CTU allow you to do?

I graduated from the Open Computer Science programme at the Faculty of Electrical Engineering, and the main focus of our undergraduate professors was to teach us how to think. It wasn’t about learning how to use some popular technology, but rather about how to approach and solve various problems. In addition, the programme involved a lot of theory. I believe the biggest opportunity that OI and FEL offer is the ability to study anything that sparks your interest instead of specialising in one field – even though it can be administratively difficult to coordinate. A good example of this is the prg.ai Minor, or the choice of minors within the OI more generally.  

Students also have the opportunity to pursue research as a career thanks to the continuity of undergraduate to master’s to doctoral studies. At the same time, students can try their hand at doing research early on as part of their undergraduate degree at FEL. We involve students not only in our computational robotics laboratory, but in the entire artificial intelligence center of which we are part. This gives people the opportunity to experience research work, from reading papers for the first time to experimenting, processing results and writing their own publishable papers. And I think that either puts students off or gets them excited for a future in academia.

How do you feel about being a female researcher at CTU?

At CTU, the percentage of women is already growing – slowly but surely. For example, Open Computer Science includes fields where female representation is already much higher. It is far from being the traditional men’s club one may think of. I don’t feel that I am somehow disadvantaged or advantaged. My colleagues and other students care more about whether I understand the field and have a passion for it.

What do you like about the academic environment?

The academy gives me an opportunity to keep learning. Not that my grades have always looked the part, but I love learning new things. And academia allows me to exercise that curiosity. In addition, there are plenty of opportunities for further development: personally and career-wise. You don’t just have to do research, you can teach or continue your studies even further, become an associate or professor. It seems to me that in the private sector it is much more variable. Most employees are not quite as free to develop their own ideas, they have to focus on assigned tasks. Whereas at the university I was able to come up with my own project which interested me, and I was given the opportunity to implement it myself. It seems to me that the private sector is slower in this respect, but of course it also has a lot of advantages. Still – unless I would be able to found my own company, I think I would steer clear of the public sector for now.

In what direction do you want to develop further in the academy?

I enjoy science, despite the occasional bad periods. I enjoy teaching, too, learning new information and passing it on to others. I don’t pretend to be great at it, but according to the student surveys it’s not quite so bad. Even in my research there is still room for improvement: I have come a long way in the last four years in terms of understanding problems and solving them. But there is still room for development, which is why I am continuing on to my PhD.