  Autonomous lifelong development and learning is a fundamental capability of
humans, differentiating them from current deep learning systems. However, other
branches of artificial intelligence have designed crucial ingredients towards
autonomous learning: curiosity and intrinsic motivation, social learning and
natural interaction with peers, and embodiment. These mechanisms guide
exploration and autonomous choice of goals, and integrating them with deep
learning opens stimulating perspectives. Deep learning (DL) approaches made
great advances in artificial intelligence, but are still far away from human
learning. As argued convincingly by Lake et al., differences include human
capabilities to learn causal models of the world from very little data,
leveraging compositional representations and priors like intuitive physics and
psychology. However, there are other fundamental differences between current DL
systems and human learning, as well as technical ingredients to fill this gap,
that are either superficially, or not adequately, discussed by Lake et al.
These fundamental mechanisms relate to autonomous development and learning.
They are bound to play a central role in artificial intelligence in the future.
Current DL systems require engineers to manually specify a task-specific
objective function for every new task, and learn through off-line processing of
large training databases. On the contrary, humans learn autonomously open-ended
repertoires of skills, deciding for themselves which goals to pursue or value,
and which skills to explore, driven by intrinsic motivation/curiosity and
social learning through natural interaction with peers. Such learning processes
are incremental, online, and progressive. Human child development involves a
progressive increase of complexity in a curriculum of learning where skills are
explored, acquired, and built on each other, through particular ordering and
timing. Finally, human learning happens in the physical world, and through
bodily and physical experimentation, under severe constraints on energy, time,
and computational resources. In the two last decades, the field of
Developmental and Cognitive Robotics (Cangelosi and Schlesinger, 2015, Asada et
al., 2009), in strong interaction with developmental psychology and
neuroscience, has achieved significant advances in computational
