The body is not there to compute: Comment on "Informational embodiment: Computational role of information structure in codes and robots" by Pitti et al

TL;DR

This commentary critiques applying an information-theoretic computation lens to body design and robotics, arguing that the primary role of bodies is to interact with the environment and enable robust behavior rather than to compute. It differentiates morphological non-computation from genuine computation, cautions against treating motor control as entropy-maximizing optimization, and advocates for a dynamical-systems perspective complemented by task-driven reinforcement learning. The author emphasizes motor redundancy as a source of robustness and highlights the limits of IT-based design, proposing PDWs as a potential testbed while advocating learning-based, embodied approaches. The piece situates these arguments within the Embodied AI movement, urging a shift from IT-centric design toward embodiment, dynamics, and practical control strategies for real-world robotics.

Abstract

Applying the lens of computation and information has been instrumental in driving the technological progress of our civilization as well as in empowering our understanding of the world around us. The digital computer was and for many still is the leading metaphor for how our mind operates. Information theory (IT) has also been important in our understanding of how nervous systems encode and process information. The target article deploys information and computation to bodies: to understand why they have evolved in particular ways (animal bodies) and to design optimal bodies (robots). In this commentary, I argue that the main role of bodies is not to compute.