preiew print

ex silico

soft biomorphs

Mads Bering Christiansen, Ahmad Rafsanjani & Jonas Jørgensen - July 22, 2024

the original language of this article is English

tags :

layout format :

about this contribution

Human existence is deeply enmeshed with the natural environment, and humans possess an innate connection with living beings and natural elements. Within art, design, and architecture, this is reflected in the transhistorical concept of biomorphism, which refers to a preference for or an interest in organic, lifelike forms that are evocative of nature and natural organisms.

This zoom.able disseminates research towards envisioning soft biomorphism as an alternative design paradigm for soft robotics (robots made from pliable and elastic materials). Earlier work on soft robotics has mainly been anchored in technical science and focused on improving the abilities of robots through mimicking the physiology and mechanical operations of soft natural organisms. Soft biomorphism seeks to enact a different perspective, to facilitate a reorientation of the field’s interests.

The notion of soft biomorphism is based on the simple premise of interrogating what happens when the inherently organic aesthetic of soft robots is emphasized and enhanced by incorporating inspiration from forms, colors, textures, and patterns of a biological origin. Soft biomorphism differs from other bioinspired design approaches used in robotics, as it eschews exact replication of a particular organism’s morphological features, instead favoring select idiosyncratic or general visual and haptic similarities with natural organisms. Rather than seeking to deceive users into believing that a robot is alive, biomorphic elements are incorporated to cultivate connection and empathy between humans and machines. By appearing lifelike, yet unfamiliar, soft biomorphic robot designs could facilitate more open-ended, negotiable human–robot relations that are not modeled on human–human interaction or interactions with specific animals or domesticated pets. The artistic motivations underlying soft biomorphism also include critically reflecting on the boundaries between nature, technology, and their cultural uses and meanings.

This practice-based work unites approaches from our diverse disciplinary backgrounds within soft robotics, mechanical engineering, human–robot interaction, artistic practice, and design research. We initially sought to unpack and enact soft biomorphism through the construction of a series of material prototypes and actuated behavioral objects. The interaction potentials of these soft biomorphic prototypes were subsequently interrogated in a physical human–robot interaction study (Christiansen et al., 2024).

This zoom.able focuses on articulating soft materiality and the biomorphological character of the prototypes as grounds for sensory perception, a potentiality of bodily sensations, and distinct types of embodied knowledge. While movement, sensing, and artificial cognition are integral to robotics technology and its aesthetics in general, our work investigates how soft materials themselves hold the potential to generate their own forms and relations when embedded in robotics. We further explore the aesthetics of soft biomorphic robots by employing photographs of our physical prototypes and text descriptions of their biomorphic inspirations as inputs for an AI image generation software. The resulting outputs, presented jointly on the final layer of the zoomable, suggest that connections in the web of life self-reflexively query the reification and remediation of biomorphic qualities within the virtual, latent space of global visual culture.

credits

authors: Mads Bering Christiansen*, Ahmad Rafsanjani*, Jonas Jørgensen*

* SDU Soft Robotics research lab, University of Southern Denmark

photography: Mads Bering Christiansen, Cao Danh Do

photo editing: Oliver Heldmann, Mads Bering Christiansen

references and rights

illustration copyrights

read more read less

Copyright 2024 by the authors. Reproduced with permission.

bibliography and references

read more read less

books and book chapters

Botar, Oliver. 2016. “Biomorphism.” In Routledge Encyclopedia of Modernism (1st ed.). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781135000356-REM770-1

Botar, Oliver & Isabel Wünsche, eds. 2017. Biocentrism and Modernism (1st ed.). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315096315

McDonnell, Rachel, and Bilge Mutlu. 2021. “Appearance.” In The Handbook on Socially Interactive Agents: 20 years of Research on Embodied Conversational Agents, Intelligent Virtual Agents, and Social Robotics Volume 1: Methods, Behavior, Cognition (1st ed), 105–146. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3477322.3477327

Wilson, Edward O. 1984. Biophilia. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

journal articles

Budak, Ece Polen, Onur Zirhli, Adam A. Stokes, and Ozge Akbulut. 2016. “The Breathing Wall (BRALL)—Triggering Life (in)animate Surfaces.” Leonardo, 49 (2): 162–163. https://doi.org/10.1162/LEON_a_01199

Christiansen, Mads B., Jonas Jørgensen, Anne-Sophie E. Belling, and Laura Beloff. 2020. “Soft Robotics and Posthuman Entities.” Journal for Artistic Research 22. https://doi.org/10.22501/jar.549014

Christiansen, Mads B., Ahmad Rafsanjani, and Jonas Jørgensen. 2024. “‘It Brings the Good Vibes’: Exploring Biomorphic Aesthetics in the Design of Soft Personal Robots.” International Journal of Social Robotics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-023-01037-6

Jørgensen, Jonas. 2023. “Towards a Soft Science of Soft Robots: A Call for a Place for Aesthetics in Soft Robotics Research.” ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction 12 (2), 15: 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1145/3533681

Kovač, Mirko. 2014. “The Bioinspiration Design Paradigm: A Perspective for Soft Robotics.” Soft Robotics, 1 (1): 28–37. https://doi.org/10.1089/soro.2013.0004

Sandry, Eleanor. 2015. “Re-evaluating the Form and Communication of Social Robots.” International Journal of Social Robotics 7 (3), 335–346. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0278-3

conference papers

Boer, Laurens, and Harvey Bewley. 2018. “Reconfiguring the Appearance and Expression of Social Robots by Acknowledging their Otherness.” Proceedings of the 2018 Designing Interactive Systems Conference, 667–677. https://doi.org/10.1145/3196709.3196743

Sabinson, Elena, Isha Pradhan, and Keith Evan Green. 2021. “Plant-Human Embodied Biofeedback (pheB): A Soft Robotic Surface for Emotion Regulation in Confined Physical Space.” Proceedings of the Fifteenth International Conference on Tangible, Embedded, and Embodied Interaction, 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1145/3430524.3446065

doctoral dissertations

Jørgensen, Jonas. 2019. “Constructing Soft Robot Aesthetics: Art, Sensation, and Materiality in Practice.” Doctoral dissertation, IT University of Copenhagen. https://pure.itu.dk/da/publications/constructing-soft-robot-aesthetics-art-sensation-and-materiality-

Wihart, Michael. 2015. “The Architecture of Soft Machines.” Doctoral dissertation, University College London. https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/id/eprint/1469447/

exhibition catalogues

Steiermärkisches Landesmuseum Joanneum, Graz. 2008. Leben?/Life?: Biomorphe Formen in der Skulptur/Biomorphic Forms in Sculpture. Verlag der Buchhandlung.

 

to cite this article

This article is using Chicago format for its references

Christiansen, Mads Bering, Ahmad Rafsanjani, and Jonas Jørgensen. 2024. “Ex Silico: Soft Biomorphs.” .able journal: https://able-journal.org/en/ex-silico

discover other articles

- +

this is a zoom.able
zoom and drag and drop to navigate in this project

  • 0
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • 21
  • 22
  • 23
  • 24
  • 25
  • 26
  • 27
  • 28
  • 29
  • 30
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 36
  • 37
  • 38
  • 39
  • 40
  • 41
  • 42
  • 43
  • 44
  • 45
  • 46
  • 47
  • 48
  • 49
  • 50
  • 51
  • 52
  • 53
  • 54
  • 55
  • 56
  • 57
  • 58
  • 59
  • 60
  • 61
  • 62
  • 63
  • 64
  • 65
  • 66
  • 67
  • 68
  • 69
  • 70
  • 71
  • 72
  • 73
  • 74
  • 75
  • 76
  • 77
  • 78
  • 79
  • 80
  • 81
  • 82
  • 83
  • 84
  • 85
  • 86
  • 87
  • 88
  • 89
  • 90
  • 91
  • 92
  • 93
  • 94
  • 95
  • 96
  • 97
  • 98
  • 99
%