Challenges in Collaborative HRI for Remote Robot Teams

Collaboration between human supervisors and remote teams of robots is highly challenging, particularly in high-stakes, distant, hazardous locations, such as off-shore energy platforms. In order for these teams of robots to truly be beneficial, they need to be trusted to operate autonomously, performing tasks such as inspection and emergency response, thus reducing the number of personnel placed in harm's way. As remote robots are generally trusted less than robots in close-proximity, we present a solution to instil trust in the operator through a `mediator robot' that can exhibit social skills, alongside sophisticated visualisation techniques. In this position paper, we present general challenges and then take a closer look at one challenge in particular, discussing an initial study, which investigates the relationship between the level of control the supervisor hands over to the mediator robot and how this affects their trust. We show that the supervisor is more likely to have higher trust overall if their initial experience involves handing over control of the emergency situation to the robotic assistant. We discuss this result, here, as well as other challenges and interaction techniques for human-robot collaboration.Comment: 9 pages. Peer reviewed position paper accepted in the CHI 2019 Workshop: The Challenges of Working on Social Robots that Collaborate with People (SIRCHI2019), ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, May 2019, Glasgow, U

Effects of alarms on control of robot teams

Annunciator driven supervisory control (ADSC) is a widely used technique for directing human attention to control systems otherwise beyond their capabilities. ADSC requires associating abnormal parameter values with alarms in such a way that operator attention can be directed toward the involved subsystems or conditions. This is hard to achieve in multirobot control because it is difficult to distinguish abnormal conditions for states of a robot team. For largely independent tasks such as foraging, however, self-reflection can serve as a basis for alerting the operator to abnormalities of individual robots. While the search for targets remains unalarmed the resulting system approximates ADSC. The described experiment compares a control condition in which operators perform a multirobot urban search and rescue (USAR) task without alarms with ADSC (freely annunciated) and with a decision aid that limits operator workload by showing only the top alarm. No differences were found in area searched or victims found, however, operators in the freely annunciated condition were faster in detecting both the annunciated failures and victims entering their cameras' fields of view. Copyright 2011 by Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Inc. All rights reserved

Understanding the Role of Trust in Human-Autonomy Teaming

This study aims to better understand trust in human-autonomy teams, finding that trust is related to team performance. A wizard of oz methodology was used in an experiment to simulate an autonomous agent as a team member in a remotely piloted aircraft system environment. Specific focuses of the study were team performance and team social behaviors (specifically trust) of human-autonomy teams. Results indicate 1) that there are lower levels of trust in the autonomous agent in low performing teams than both medium and high performing teams, 2) there is a loss of trust in the autonomous agent across low, medium, and high performing teams over time, and 3) that in addition to the human team members indicating low levels of trust in the autonomous agent, both low and medium performing teams also indicated lower levels of trust in their human team members

Structuring AI Teammate Communication: An Exploration of AI\u27s Communication Strategies in Human-AI Teams

In the past decades, artificial intelligence (AI) has been implemented in various domains to facilitate humans in their work, such as healthcare and the automotive industry. Such application of AI has led to increasing attention on human-AI teaming, where AI closely collaborates with humans as a teammate. AI as a teammate is expected to have the ability to coordinate with humans by sharing task-related information, predicting other teammates’ behaviors, and progressing team tasks accordingly. To complete these team activities effectively, AI teammates must communicate with humans, such as sharing updates and checking team progress. Even though communication is a core element of teamwork that helps to achieve effective coordination, how to design and structure human-AI communication in teaming environments still remains unclear. Given the context-dependent characteristics of communication, research on human-AI teaming communication needs to narrow down and focus on specific communication elements/components, such as the proactivity of communication and communication content. In doing so, this dissertation explores how AI teammates’ communication should be structured by modifying communication components through three studies, each of which details a critical component of effective AI communication: (1) communication proactivity, (2) communication content (explanation), and (3) communication approach (verbal vs. non-verbal). These studies provide insights into how AI teammates’ communication ii can be integrated into teamwork and how to design AI teammate communication in human-AI teaming. Study 1 explores an important communication element, communication proactivity, and its impact on team processes and team performance. Specifically, communication proactivity in this dissertation refers to whether an AI teammate proactively communicates with human teammates, i.e., proactively pushing information to human teammates. Experimental analysis shows that AI teammates’ proactive communication plays a crucial role in impacting human perceptions, such as perceived teammate performance and satisfaction with the teammate. Importantly, teams with a non-proactive communication AI teammate increase team performance more than teams with a proactive communication AI as the human and the AI collaborate more. This study identifies the positive impact of AI being proactive in communication at the initial stage of task coordination, as well as the potential need for AI’s flexibility in their communication proactivity (i.e., once human and AI teammates’ coordination pattern forms, AI can be non-proactive in communication). Study 2 examines communication content by focusing on AI’s explanation and its impact on human perceptions in teaming environments. Results indicate that AI’s explanation, as part of communication content, does not always positively impact human trust in human-AI teaming. Instead, the impact of AI’s explanations on human perceptions depends on specific collaboration scenarios. Specifically, AI’s explanations facilitate trust in the AI teammate when explaining why AI disobeys humans’ orders, but hinder trust when explaining why AI lies to humans. In addition, AI giving an explanation of why they ignored the human teammate’s injury was perceived to be more effective than AI not providing such an explanation. The findings emphasize the context-dependent characteristic of AI’s communication content with a focus on AI’s explanation of their actions. iii Study 3 investigates AI’s communication approach, which was manipulated as verbal vs. non-verbal communication. Results indicate that AI teammates’ verbal/nonverbal communication does not impact human trust in the AI teammate, but facilitates the maintenance of humans’ situation awareness in task coordination. In addition, AI with non-verbal communication is perceived as having lower communication quality and lower performance. Importantly, AI with non-verbal communication has better team performance in human-human-AI teams than human-AI-AI teams, whereas AI with verbal communication has better team performance in human-AI-AI teams than human-human-AI teams. These three studies together address multiple research gaps in human-AI team communication and provide a holistic view of the design and structure of AI’s communication by examining three specific aspects of communication in human-AI teaming. In addition, each study in this dissertation proposes practical design implications on AI’s communication in human-AI teams, which will assist AI designers and developers to create better AI teammates that facilitate humans in teaming environments

Attention Allocation for Human Multi-Robot Control: Cognitive Analysis based on Behavior Data and Hidden States

Human multi-robot interaction exploits both the human operator’s high-level decision-making skills and the robotic agents’ vigorous computing and motion abilities. While controlling multi-robot teams, an operator’s attention must constantly shift between individual robots to maintain sufficient situation awareness. To conserve an operator’s attentional resources, a robot with self reflect capability on its abnormal status can help an operator focus her attention on emergent tasks rather than unneeded routine checks. With the proposing self-reflect aids, the human-robot interaction becomes a queuing framework, where the robots act as the clients to request for interaction and an operator acts as the server to respond these job requests. This paper examined two types of queuing schemes, the self-paced Open-queue identifying all robots’ normal/abnormal conditions, whereas the forced-paced shortest-job-first (SJF) queue showing a single robot’s request at one time by following the SJF approach. As a robot may miscarry its experienced failures in various situations, the effects of imperfect automation were also investigated in this paper. The results suggest that the SJF attentional scheduling approach can provide stable performance in both primary (locate potential targets) and secondary (resolve robots’ failures) tasks, regardless of the system’s reliability levels. However, the conventional results (e.g., number of targets marked) only present little information about users’ underlying cognitive strategies and may fail to reflect the user’s true intent. As understanding users’ intentions is critical to providing appropriate cognitive aids to enhance task performance, a Hidden Markov Model (HMM) is used to examine operators’ underlying cognitive intent and identify the unobservable cognitive states. The HMM results demonstrate fundamental differences among the queuing mechanisms and reliability conditions. The findings suggest that HMM can be helpful in investigating the use of human cognitive resources under multitasking environments