Should Collaborative Robots be Transparent?

We often assume that robots which collaborate with humans should behave in ways that are transparent (e.g., legible, explainable). These transparent robots intentionally choose actions that convey their internal state to nearby humans: for instance, a transparent robot might exaggerate its trajectory to indicate its goal. But while transparent behavior seems beneficial for human-robot interaction, is it actually optimal? In this paper we consider collaborative settings where the human and robot have the same objective, and the human is uncertain about the robot's type (i.e., the robot's internal state). We extend a recursive combination of Bayesian Nash equilibrium and the Bellman equation to solve for optimal robot policies. Interestingly, we discover that it is not always optimal for collaborative robots to be transparent; instead, human and robot teams can sometimes achieve higher rewards when the robot is opaque. In contrast to transparent robots, opaque robots select actions that withhold information from the human. Our analysis suggests that opaque behavior becomes optimal when either (a) human-robot interactions have a short time horizon or (b) users are slow to learn from the robot's actions. We extend this theoretical analysis to user studies across 43 total participants in both online and in-person settings. We find that -- during short interactions -- users reach higher rewards when working with opaque partners, and subjectively rate opaque robots as about equal to transparent robots. See videos of our experiments here: https://youtu.be/u8q1Z7WHUu

Towards Robots that Influence Humans over Long-Term Interaction

When humans interact with robots influence is inevitable. Consider an autonomous car driving near a human: the speed and steering of the autonomous car will affect how the human drives. Prior works have developed frameworks that enable robots to influence humans towards desired behaviors. But while these approaches are effective in the short-term (i.e., the first few human-robot interactions), here we explore long-term influence (i.e., repeated interactions between the same human and robot). Our central insight is that humans are dynamic: people adapt to robots, and behaviors which are influential now may fall short once the human learns to anticipate the robot's actions. With this insight, we experimentally demonstrate that a prevalent game-theoretic formalism for generating influential robot behaviors becomes less effective over repeated interactions. Next, we propose three modifications to Stackelberg games that make the robot's policy both influential and unpredictable. We finally test these modifications across simulations and user studies: our results suggest that robots which purposely make their actions harder to anticipate are better able to maintain influence over long-term interaction. See videos here: https://youtu.be/ydO83cgjZ2