How does peoples’ perception of control depend on the criticality of a task performed by a robot Paladyn

© 2019 Adeline Chanseau et al., published by De Gruyter. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Public License.Robot companions are starting to become more common and people are becoming more familiar with devices such as Google Home, Alexa or Pepper,one must wonder what is the optimum way for people to control their devices? This paper provides presents an investigation into how much direct control people want to have of their robot companion and how dependent this is on the criticality of the tasks the robot performs. A live experiment was conducted in the University of Hertfordshire Robot House, with a robot companion performing four different type of tasks. The four tasks were: booking a doctor’s appointment, helping the user to build a Lego character, doing a dance with the user, and carrying biscuits for the user. The selection of these tasks was based on our previous research to define tasks which were relatively high and low in criticality. The main goal of the study was to find what level of direct control over their robot participants and if this was dependent on the criticality of the task performed by the robot. Fifty people took part in the study, and each experienced every task in a random order. Overall,it was found that participants’ perception of control was higher when the robot was performing a task in a semi-autonomous mode. However, for the task "carrying biscuits", although participants perceived to be more in control with the robot performing the task in a semi autonomous mode, they actually preferred to have the robot performing the task automatically (where they felt less in control). The results also show that, for the task "booking a doctor’s appointment", considered to be the most critical of all four tasks, participants did not prefer that the robot chose the date of the appointment as they felt infantilised.Peer reviewe

Using humanoid robots to study human behavior

Our understanding of human behavior advances as our humanoid robotics work progresses-and vice versa. This team's work focuses on trajectory formation and planning, learning from demonstration, oculomotor control and interactive behaviors. They are programming robotic behavior based on how we humans “program” behavior in-or train-each other

Spartan Daily, November 6, 1980

Volume 75, Issue 48https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/spartandaily/6684/thumbnail.jp

Choreographic and Somatic Approaches for the Development of Expressive Robotic Systems

As robotic systems are moved out of factory work cells into human-facing environments questions of choreography become central to their design, placement, and application. With a human viewer or counterpart present, a system will automatically be interpreted within context, style of movement, and form factor by human beings as animate elements of their environment. The interpretation by this human counterpart is critical to the success of the system's integration: knobs on the system need to make sense to a human counterpart; an artificial agent should have a way of notifying a human counterpart of a change in system state, possibly through motion profiles; and the motion of a human counterpart may have important contextual clues for task completion. Thus, professional choreographers, dance practitioners, and movement analysts are critical to research in robotics. They have design methods for movement that align with human audience perception, can identify simplified features of movement for human-robot interaction goals, and have detailed knowledge of the capacity of human movement. This article provides approaches employed by one research lab, specific impacts on technical and artistic projects within, and principles that may guide future such work. The background section reports on choreography, somatic perspectives, improvisation, the Laban/Bartenieff Movement System, and robotics. From this context methods including embodied exercises, writing prompts, and community building activities have been developed to facilitate interdisciplinary research. The results of this work is presented as an overview of a smattering of projects in areas like high-level motion planning, software development for rapid prototyping of movement, artistic output, and user studies that help understand how people interpret movement. Finally, guiding principles for other groups to adopt are posited.Comment: Under review at MDPI Arts Special Issue "The Machine as Artist (for the 21st Century)" http://www.mdpi.com/journal/arts/special_issues/Machine_Artis