One possible explanation why the symbol grounding problem has emerged late in the history of computer science is because the theory is difficult to realize on a computer. Suppose natural language is important for robot control, the problem is create a language parser which is working for a concrete domain.
A possible command for a robot might be "Move until obstacle and then stop". Each of the words is stored as a string, but it remains unclear who to process the instruction into actions for a robot. The reason is, that the sentence is formulated in English but computers need a programming language as input. Even if every word is encoded as a number, it doesn't make sense to submit an array with numbers to the robot because its not possible to add or subtract the values in a meaningful way.
In general the problem is how to convert natural language into a computer program. Without solving this issue, the symbol grounding problem remains only a philosophical problem without any practical consequences.
The good news is, that the problem of programming a parser can be solved. Not with tools from computer science but by using techniques from linguistics, namely language games. Instead of treating language parsing as an algorithm problem, the idea is to invent around words a puzzle game. Typical language games are:
- Name guessing game. Player1 points to an object in the reality, and Player2 has to tell the name
- NPC quest game, a non player character in a role playing game formulates a quest like "bring me the sword from the wood" and the player has to fulfill the task
- bounding box game, player1 says a word like "table" and player2 has to draw a bounding box around this object
All these language games are located outside of computer science. They have nothing to do with algorithms, programming language nor existing robotics libraries, but they are games played with 2 human players.
The interesting situation is, that its possible to simulate the games with a computer. The software encodes the rules of the language game, determines the score for the human player and then the player can take action inside this game.
The problem is not how to program a certain parser, but the problem is how to formulate the game outside of a computer first. A well formulated game can be implemented in a software with ease. The programmer needs only the specification of the game including its rule, and then its possible to program the game with python. The only requirement is, that the computer works like the original language game. The programming workflow is identical to implement card games and board games on a computer.
Robotics and Artificial Intelligence
July 25, 2026
Engine for grounded language
July 24, 2026
Die späte Entdeckung der Schrift im Kontext von Robotik
Die Schrift ist eine sehr alte Erfindung der Menschheit. Die erste Bilderschrift, die Ägyptischen Hieroglyphen entstanden um 3200 v. Chr. Insgesamt ist Schrift und natürliche Sprache sehr detailiert erforscht. Es gibt umfassende Wörterbücher, Darstellungen welche die Geschichte der Sprache zeigen und Untersuchungen bezüglich Wortherkunft.
Vereinfacht gesagt sind Wörter Referenzsysteme zur Realität. Substantive stehen für Objekte wie "Himmel, Tisch, Apfel", Adjektive stehen für Tätigkeiten wie "Laufen, springen, geben" und Adjektive werden als Eigenschaftswörter verwendet wie "gelb, groß, schnell, feucht". Das Wissen bezüglich Wortarten und die Nennung von Beispielwörtern ist banal, allerdings nur für die Sprachwissenschaft selber. Im Bereich Computerwissenschaft und Mathematik wurde natürliche Sprache lange Zeit ignoriert. Es gab zwar Versuche chatbots zu programmieren, aber das war nur ein Teilbereich der Künstlichen Intelligenz.
Erst in jüngerer Zeit stellte sich heraus, dass natürliche Sprache womöglich das fehlende Puzzleteil darstellt mit der man künstliche Intelligenz inbesamt realisieren kann. Und zwar indem man Sprache als Technologie verwendet. Insbesondere dessen Eigenschaft auf die Realität zu verweisen macht es zum idealen Abstraktionsmechanismus. Es müssen keine neuen Sprachen erfunden werden sondern vorhandene Sprachen wie English, Deutsch usw. bieten bereits ein umfassendes Vokabular was von Robotern ähnlich wie Menschen verwendet werden kann. Alles was eine Maschine dafür benötigt ist eine Übersetzungstabelle von Bildern zu Sprache und in umgekehrter Richtung. Mit Hilfe dieser Bild zu Wort Tabelle kann man einem Roboter ein Kommando geben wie "Fahre zum Tisch". Und der Roboter übersetzt den Satz dann in Bilder und in Aktionen.
Bis ungefähr zum Jahr 2000 hat die KI Forschung nach Algorithmen gesucht mit deren Hilfe sich denkende Maschinen konstruieren lassen. Typische Algorithmen waren Lernverfahren für neuronale Netze, SLAM Algorithmen zur Selbstlokalisierung, A* Pfadplanungsalgorithmen oder Momdel predictive control Algorithmen. Die Annahme lautete jeweils dass mit diesen Algorithmen denkende Maschinen konstruiert werden könnten. Diese Annahme ist jedoch falsch. Es liegt zusätzlich der Verdacht nahe, dass es generell keine Algorithmen gibt, die Künstliche Intelligenz erzeugen, weil ein Algorithmus per se nicht mächtig genug ist um Roboter zu steuern. Was man stattdessen verwenden könnte wäre natürliche Sprache als zentrales Koordinierungsinstrument. Sprache ist ein Interface zwischen den Wortsymbolen einerseits und der Realität andererseits. Dadurch kann die komplexe Realität in wenige Wörter komprimiert werden.
Erst durch diese Realitätskompression ist es möglich den Handlungsraum für Roboter zu verkleinern. Der Roboter plant nicht länger in einem 3d Raum mit Trajektorien sondern der Roboter plant mit Hilfe von Verben und Substantiven in einem abstrakten Sprachraum. Seit der Erfindung von Word embeddings wie Word2vec mag dieser Ansatz selbstverständlich klingen aber bis zum Jahr 2000 war der Fokus auf Sprache eine Revolution.
Noch immer steht natürliche Sprache ein wenig außerhalb der klassischen Computerwissenschaft. Es hat nichts zu tun mit Elektrotechnik, Mathematik oder Algorithmen, sondern die Sprachwissenschaft hat ihren Ursprung in den Geisteswissenschaften. Nicht nur in der Dewey Dezimalklassifikation wie sie in Bibliotheken verwendet wird, sondern auch in der Gliederung von Universitäten sind Geistes- und Naturwissenschaften unversöhnliche Gegensätze die getrennt betrachtet werden.
Open systems for robotics
Robotics in the past was organized with a closed system paradigm. A robot was described as a machine which consists of hardware, software and algorithms and the task for the programmer was to improve the internal mechanism of the robot. It was ignored that robots are communicating with the outside world. For example a robot might receives commmands by teleoperation and submits a status code to the operator. Such kind of interaction was mostly described as wrong path towards robotics because such a machine isn't autonomous anymore. There decision making isn't determined by the internal algorithm but from the outside which was seen as anti pattern in Artificial intelligence.
It takes decades until computer science has questioned the self created bias. Modern robotics is working as open system which means, that the robot gets information from sensors and from remote control. Also the robot interacts with human operators and is able to answer questions like "What object is visible in the camera?".
The transition from closed to open systems in robotics can be seen as an important innovation. In contrast to invent yet another path planning algorithm or program a robot control software in C/C++ the open system paradigm reformulates the goals of a robot system. It puts a higher importance on the robot's environment and allows the enviornment to take influence on the robot. There are many examples available in the history of robotics with this background, e.g. Braitenberg vehicle, kismet social robot and SHRDLU. These projects have demonstrated interactive robotics. There is always a robot and a human operator who interacts with the robot.
From a technical perspectives, interactive robotics is equal to teleoperation. Teleoperation was recognized by computer science as opposite to artificial intelligence, because the machine doesn't decide by itself but is guided by external human wisdom. So the maschine can't be called a robot anymore but has more in common with a RC Car.
The rejection of teleoperation makes sense on the first look. If a human operator is in charge to control the RC car, then no artificial intelligence is needed. Therefor it has nothing to do with thinking machines and is located outside of robotics. Only autonomous robots are intelligent robots.
With a modern perspective, Artificial intelligence isn't located inside of a robot but its the interface between a robot and its environment. Such an interface can become smart in the sense that the interface understands natural language.
Practical demonstration of the Total turing test
Stevan Harnad coined around the year 1990 the term "total turing test" which is a philosophical description of an instruction following task in robotics. What is missing is a practical demonstration of such a test for a real robot.
Such a demonstration can be realized in a simple video game modeled as a language game. An entry level example is a navigation task in a graph. There are 8 nodes connected with lines and the robot has to move along the graph to reach a certain goal node. Possible interaction with the robot would be:
- what is your position?
- what is your battery status?
- which nodes are reachable from current position?
- Move north
- move to node #3.
- what is the shortest path to reach node #6?
The robot is in charge to answer these requests in natural language and with motor actions. The problem is easy enough to get implemented as normal computer code without using advanced large language models or vision language action models. The human to robot interaction can be simplified by using a codebook. The amount of possible commands is given in the menu and the human can select one of the commands. IN other words, the Total Turing Test (TTT) is some sort of speaker to hearer interaction game played between a human and a robot.
July 22, 2026
Grounded language in open systems
The box on the left is the human who describes the reality with natural language. The box on the right is the environment which can be perceived with sensors. Symbol grounding is the connection between both boxes.
From a system perspective the 2 box system is an open system because both boxes are connected to each other. Natural language from the left box is referencing to physical objects in the right box, while perceived reality in the right box gets described with English words in the left box.
The assumption is, that there are 2 different systems available which are working with different internal logic. The language layer consists of nouns, verbs, adjectives and grammars which is the symbolic layer. In contrast, the environment has no natural language but it consists of sensor perception, motor actions and 3d objects. The 2 box paradigm describes in a simplified format what natural language is about. Its an abstraction mechanism for the reality. Physical objects like a table or a banana are labeled with words. The ability to label objects is the key element in grounded language and allows to build intelligent robots.
Natural Language as AI technology
Languages likes English or French are discussed by Linguists not by computer scientists. A language is located in the humanities but not within the mathematics department. So its logical that most Linguists have no idea about computer science and vice versa. This might explain why AI research wasn't succesful over decades, because Natural langauge is the missing puzzle piece to make machines intelligent.
From a birds eye perspective, a language like English consists of verbs, nouns and adjectives. The grammar consists of rules how to connect the words to sentences. And language also is directed towards the reality. A word like "a flying bird" or "green flower" is referencing to objects which are available in front of the speaker.
The ability to name every object from the reality with a word and describe activities also with words makes natural language a powerful technology which can be used for human to human communication and machine to human communication both. In case of Artificial Intelligence a computer needs to parse natural language which is the bottleneck in modern AI research. Suppose a computer program asks the user to enter a word. The user enters "red box", then the computer stores the input in a variable but it has no consequences. So the computer isn't able to understand the meaning.
This parsing problem can be solved by inventing a language game. A language game is similar to a 2d arcade game a rule book which explain who to react to a certain input pattern. Typical language oriented games are translation games, the board game Scrabble or the "guess what" game. After implementing these games on a computer, the input of a human will have consequences. The consequences are given by the rules of a certain game, for example in a translation game the user needs to enter the correct translation for a word from another language. The computer verifies if the answer is correct.
Strictly spoken, not the computer decides about the meaning but the rules of the language games are providing the meaning. Modern AI research after the year 2020 is mostly focused on natural language and language games like "Visual question answering", "instruction following" and "question answering chatbots". All these games are formalizing the human to machine interaction in a sense that the computer can determine a score. This score allows to train artificial neural networks. The result of the training process is recognized as Artificial Intelligence in the modern sense. It allows to control robots with language instructions, and generate text with Large language models.
A common assumption in the past was that its very complicated to parse natural language with a computer. This assumption is only correct if the entire corpus of English should be understand by a computer which is around 1 million words and stored in endless amount of books. Parsing this written language with a computer is indeed a hard problem for computer science. What is possible instead is to reduce the task to a subset of English which consists of a dozens words from a restricted domain which are used to play a language game. In the minimal case, there are 6 picture cards and 6 word cards and the task is to match the correct pairs. Such a language game can be implemented in a short computer program and can be played by an automated AI algorithm. The AI algorithm has access to a database with the correct answers. This allows the computer to connect the picture of a banana with the word "banana".
July 21, 2026
Head up display for a kitchen robot
The picture shows an artist version of a head up display. It contains of:
- camera picture of a kitchen
- text box with inner voice
- bounding boxes
- labels for the bounding boxes
Surprisingly, the information in the picture can solve the symbol grounding problem because the head up display connects visual perception with textual information. The text from the inner voice like "I need to find 200g of flour" can be converted into meaning with the help of the bounding boxes. There is a box available with such an ingredient. The task for the robot is not to plan actions but the main problem is to connect language from the inner voice with detected objects in the camera.
Such a link of visual objects with textual labels is the core element in grounded language. If the robot is able to identify objects from the text box, its possible to generate all sort of inner voice. For example, the robot can say that he needs to peel the banana or "open the oven". All these nouns and verbs are translated into position of the bounding box on the screen which allows to execute the action physically.


