I.

Translate the following text into English:

n reelele neuronale informaia nu mai este memorat n zone bine precizate, ca n
cazul calculatoarelor standard, ci este memorat difuz n toat reeaua. Memorarea se face
stabilind valori corespunztoare ale ponderilor conexiunilor sinaptice dintre neuronii reelei.
Un alt element important, care este, probabil, principalul responsabil pentru succesul
modelelor conexioniste, este capacitatea reelelor neuronale de a nva din exemple. n mod
tradiional, pentru a rezolva o problem, trebuie s elaborm un model (matematic, logic,
lingvistic etc.) al acesteia. Apoi, pornind de la acest model, trebuie s indicm o succesiune de
operaii reprezentnd algoritmul de rezolvare a problemei. Exist, ns, probleme practice de
mare complexitate pentru care stabilirea unui algoritm, fie el i unul aproximativ, este dificil
sau chiar imposibil.
n acest caz, problema nu poate fi abordat folosind un calculator tradiional,
indiferent de resursele de memorie i timp de calcul disponibil. Caracteristic reelelor
neuronale este faptul c, pornind de la o mulime de exemple, ele sunt capabile s sintetizeze
n mod implicit un anumit model al problemei. Se poate spune c o reea neuronal
construiete singur algoritmul pentru rezolvarea unei probleme, dac i furnizm o mulime
reprezentativ de cazuri particulare (exemple de instruire).
Inteligena artificial, ca i in cazul inteligenei biologice, se dobndete printr-un
proces continuu i de durat de nvare, de aceea problema nvrii ocup un loc important
n cercetarea mainilor auto-instruibile (machine learning). Prin nvarea automat se nelege
studiul sistemelor capabile s-i mbunteasc performanele, utiliznd o mulime de date de
instruire.
Sistemele cu inteligen artificial obinuite au capaciti de nvare foarte reduse sau
nu au deloc. n cazul acestor sisteme cunoaterea trebuie sa fie programat n interiorul lor.
Dac sistemele conin o eroare, ele nu o vor putea corecta, indiferent de cte ori se execut
procedura respectiv. Practic aceste sisteme nu-si pot mbunti performanele prin
experien si nici nu pot nva cunotine specifice domeniului, prin experimentare. Aproape
toate sistemele cu inteligen artificial sunt sisteme deductive. Aceste sisteme pot trage
concluzii din cunoaterea ncorporat sau furnizat, dar ele nu pot s genereze singure noi
cunotine.
Pe msur ce un sistem cu inteligen artificial are de rezolvat sarcini mai complexe,
crete i cunoaterea ce trebuie reprezentat n el (fapte, reguli, teorii). n general un sistem
funcioneaz bine, n concordan cu scopul fixat prin cunoaterea furnizat, dar orice micare
n afara competenei sale face ca performanele lui s scad rapid. Acest fenomen este numit
i fragilitatea cunoaterii. Una din direciile de cercetare n privina mainilor instruibile este
modelarea neuronal . Modelarea neuronal dezvolt sisteme instruibile pentru scopuri
generale, care pornesc cu o cantitate mic de cunotine iniiale. Astfel de sisteme se numesc
reele neuronale sisteme cu auto-organizare sau sisteme conexioniste.
Un sistem de acest tip const dintr-o reea de elemente interconectate de tip neuron,
care realizeaz anumite funcii logice simple. Un astfel de sistem nva prin modificarea
intensitii de conexiune dintre elemente, adic schimbnd ponderile asociate acestor
conexiuni. Cunoaterea iniial ce este furnizat sistemului este reprezentat de caracteristicile
obiectelor considerate i de o configuraie iniial a reelei.

II. Translate the following text into Romanian:

Robots That Teach Themselves
Robots on production lines must be taught where to move. That is true in spades for
robots that move silicon wafers in semiconductor manufacturing. Wafer-handling robots are
carefully taught each location from which they retrieve wafers and where to deliver them. The
teaching process is not a one-time affair. Robots must be taught after a tool is integrated in the
semiconductor manufacturing process, as part of maintenance, and again after many repairs.
The process of teaching a robot is time consuming and takes a lot of skill and
judgment. And of course the stakes can be large. An incorrectly taught point can later result in
a damaged or broken wafer. To calibrate wafer-handoff positions, the technician doing the
teaching must be able to direct the appropriate robot motion and determine teach points. This
can be tricky. The teacher must manually jog the robot on the proper path to the teach point
typically with several hardware or software interlocks defeated. It is a situation ripe for human
error and tool-damaging collisions.
To determine appropriate teach positions, the teacher must subjectively eyeball the
location of the wafer handoff point to within +/- 0.25 mm. This usually takes place in a
semiconductor manufacturing clean room, in a bunny suit, in the bowels of the semiconductor
tool being calibrated. Small wonder that taught points commonly vary depending on the
teachers point of view, idiosyncrasies of the wafer transfer devices, and subtle differences in
optimal handoff points for a given tool. All in all, there can be a substantial variation in points
programmed from one session to another and even more deviation when someone new
handles the teaching. The result: compromised reliability and wafers frequently worth tens of
thousands of dollars are placed in jeopardy.
It can easily be a 6-hour job to manually teach a robot how to precisely place wafers. It
is now possible, though, to let robots calibrate themselves through software. This approach
can reduce the teaching process to about 20 minutes and eliminate the need for teaching skills.
The key to fast teaching is to have the robot automatically calibrate itself so it knows
the geometry of its surroundings precisely. In a semiconductor tool equipped with Berkeley
Process Controls Autocalibration technology, a technician presses a single button to execute a
preprogrammed calibration route. That routine automatically finds critical wafer-handler
physical reference features utilizing various application-specific sensing methods, including
touch calibration. The control system thereby learns all of the wafer handoff positions. Theres
no judgment or skill involved.
Plotting a Course
In the touch method of autocalibration technology, the robot is programmed to
intentionally drive a part of a robot arm until it gently touches a known feature of the station
or cassette. The controller also attempts to quickly determine just when the arm has touched
the station.
The principle here is that some amount of motor torque is required to move the arm
through free space. When the robot arm hits the obstruction, the motor driving the arm slows
down. Thus the first indication that the arm has hit something is that the servomotor begins to
slow.
But at the first decline in velocity, the controller cannot tell whether the deceleration is
a result of touching something or is a normal variation in the friction of bearings, belts and so
on. (Any system will experience variations in motor torque from non - uniform friction in

bearings, belts, screws and so forth). So the controllers closed-loop software will respond by
slightly increasing the motor current and, thus, motor torque.
Upon subsequent calculations of the servo velocity loop, the controller will have
additional information about whether the robot arm has touched an obstruction. If the motor
velocity again begins to increase, then the controller can deduce that it was friction and not an
obstruction that caused the need for more motor torque. If, however, the servomotor continues
to slow even with additional applied torque, then the controller deduces that the robot arm has
found an obstruction. The controller notes the motor position while simultaneously reducing
servomotor torque to ensure that contact with the tool is gentle.
Its possible to reduce the force generated during the intentional collision of the robot
wand and the station by factoring in the background torque of the arm. Specifically, one
measures the background torque for each robot axis to be touch-calibrated. The method is to
first move the robot to a safe area where it can make short movements without touching
anything. Then one-by-one, each motor is told to make a constant velocity move (usually the
same velocity used in the calibration step). When the axis has reached the constant velocity
(that is, it has finished accelerating), the machine controller samples the average motor torque.
This average is made up of numerous instantaneous motor torques, each such torque being the
output of the closed-loop control.
Once the sampling process is complete, the background torque value is determined by
taking the simple average of these samples. The sampling frequency and the number of
samples taken depend on the specific design of the machine. But a common sample size might
be 100 measurements. The average background torque would therefore be about 0.01 of the
total value.
The system stores the background torques it has calculated for each of the axes to be
used during touch calibration. Then, as the arm moves toward the feature to be touched, the
controller calculates a moving average of the torques it sees for each axis, and compares them
to the stored background torques. The system can thus decide that it has touched something
when this moving average exceeds some torque limit.
The torque limit equals the dynamic background torque plus a threshold limit. The
threshold limit is a value chosen to be larger than the torque variations seen while moving at
the touch-sensing velocity. During the routine to quantify the dynamic background torque, the
controller gauges the statistical variation of the torque samples and sets the threshold value at
some multiple of the background torque.
Once the system senses the contact, it captures the current axis position and then
moves away from the touch point.
During a typical calibration procedure, the robot has a rough idea of where features are
located even before it touches them. Thats because tool developers prime the controller with
the positions of these items from CAD drawings or manual measurements.
Designers chose the features to be touched such that the motion to locate each one is
isolated to one robot axis. This ensures en unlinked, independent coordinate.
To accurately find a feature with touch calibration, it is important to note that
most machines have semi rigid drive trains. The result is a certain amount of flexibility in
each axis that calibration procedures must take into account. The way to cancel out this
flexibility is by touching a feature from two opposite directions. In other words, make a
positive velocity or directional move to determine a feature position, then a negative velocity
or directional move to determine the same feature. In cases where its not possible to touch a
feature from both directions, it may be possible to touch a secondary feature with a known
spatial relationship to the first.
To understand why the above two-direction technique cancels out flexibility, it is
helpful to remember that the torque limit used for touch sensing is the summation of the

background torque and a threshold limit. The summation of these two torques represents a
constant applied tension. With regard to a semi rigid drive train, this reflects an equal tension
on arm components when sensing in the positive and negative directions. It is this equal
tension which makes it possible to cancel the effects of drive flexibility.
Finally, several types of robots are amenable to the autocalibration technique. Some
robots are designed with one motor per axis. Others are designed with one motor per link so
that two or more motors must move in unison to move a single axis. Depending on the design
of the robot, it is important to characterize the axis torques of all motors.
With just one motor per axis the technique simplifies into the monitoring of a single
motor. In the case of multiple motors handling axis control, a good technique is to monitor the
summation of the absolute values of the motor torque required to move the axis. In cases
where one motor puts out much more torque than the others involved in handling a single
axis, it may be acceptable to monitor only the most powerful one. The determination of the
preferable technique depends on the exact design of the machine.
Autocalibration technology has been implemented with a wide variety of robot
designs. It has proven efficient with both legacy belt-drive designs and state-of-the-art directdrive robots. Laboratory test data shows repeatability of better than o.4 mm. in locating a
wafer-transfer station using a modern direct-drive robot.