4조_SociallyInteractiveRobots_.ppt

  • 992 views
Uploaded on

 

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
992
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
33
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide
  • Ant-like robots(early 1990s) Robot collectives have been developed Robots have been used for studying social insect behavior Ant-like robot is Social robot?
  • 2. Natural cues.. : gaze, gesture
  • COG : General purpose humanoid platform which is intended for exploring theories and models of intelligent behavior and learning

Transcript

  • 1. A Survey of socially interactive robots Ansi (Sang-ik An) Bear (Geonhyeok Go) SJ (Sujung Han) HARI (Hari Sankar) BK (Byoungkil Han) Human Robot Interaction 4 th Team
  • 2. Contents Introduction CH1 Methodology CH2 1.1. The history of social robots 1.2. Social robots and social embeddedness: concepts and definitions 1.3. The history of social robots 1.4. Why socially interactive robots? 2.1. Design approaches 2.2. Design issues 2.3. Embodiment 2.4. Emotion
  • 3. Chapter1. Introduction Human Robot Interaction 4 th Team
  • 4. 1.1. The history of social robots
    • Individual social robots vs. Group social collective robots
  • 5. 1.1. The history of social robots
    • Biologically inspired robots -> Possibility of interaction robot & environment
    • robot & robot
    • Walter’s robotic tortoises, Elmer and Elsie (late 1940s)
    • : No explicit communication or mutual recognition
  • 6. 1.1. The history of social robots
    • Group -oriented social robots
      • Collective or swarm robot behavior
      • Ant-like robots(early 1990s)
      • Multi-robot or distributed robotic systems
      • Maximizing benefit through collective action
      • Behavior inspired by social insect societies
      • Societies : anonymous, homogeneous groups
        • Individuals do not matter
    Sentinel, Matrix Khepera robots foraging for “food”
  • 7. 1.1. The history of social robots
    • Individual social robots
      • Individualized societies( Individual matters ) : mammals
      • Individuals live in groups, form relationships and social networks, create alliances
      • Stick to societal norms and conventions
    Early “individual” social robots: “getting to know each other” (left) and learning by imitation (right)
  • 8. 1.1. The history of social robots
    • Social robots
      • Embodied agents that are part of a heterogeneous group
      • Recognize each other
      • Engage in social interactions
      • Possess histories
      • Explicitly communicate with and learn from each other
    Proposed by “Dautenhahan” and “Billiard”
  • 9.
    • 4 classes of social robots(by Breazeal) + 3 classes added
      • Socially evocative
        • Human-like, anthropomorphic
      • Social interface
        • Natural interface by human-like social cues and communication modalities
      • Socially receptive
        • Learning from interaction
      • Sociable
        • Pro-actively engaging with humans in order to satisfy internal social aims
    1.2. Social robots and social embeddedness : concepts and definitions Sparky
  • 10. 1.2. Social robots and social embeddedness : concepts and definitions
    • 4 classes of social robots (by Breazeal) + 3 classes added
      • Socially situated
        • Distinguish between other social agents and various objects in the environments
      • Socially embedded
        • Structurally coupled with social environment
        • Partially aware of human interactional structures
      • Socially intelligent
        • Human style social intelligence
    R2-D2 and C-3PO from Star Wars
  • 11. 1.3. Socially Interactive Robots (1/4)
    • Focus on peer-to-peer HRI
      • Robots with “human social” characteristics : emotion, dialogue, relationship, natural communication, personality, and learning
    From B.J. Fogg, Persuasive Technology : Using Computers to Change What We Think and Do
  • 12. 1.3. Socially Interactive Robots (2/4)
    • Focus on peer-to-peer HRI
      • common assumption : “humans prefer to interact with machines in the same way that they interact with real people ”
    When your computer doesn’t work…
  • 13. 1.3. Socially Interactive Robots (3/4)
    • Robot as partners, peers or assistants
      • adaptability and flexibility with a wide range of humans
      • Used as research platforms, as toys, as educational tools, or as therapeutic aids
    (from P.S. Fiske “Put Your Science to Work”)
  • 14. 1.3. Socially Interactive Robots (4/4)
    • Human as designer, observer and interaction partner
      • Requires considering the human in the loop
      • From simple reaction to human behavior, to relying on humans’ mental states and emotions
    From P. Persson et al., Understanding Socially Intelligent Agents – A Multilayered Phenomenon
  • 15. 1.4. Why Socially Interactive Robots? (1/3)
    • Application domain
      • Robot as “persuasive machine” : used to change the behavior, feelings or attitudes of humans
      • Robot as “avatar” : a representation of or representation for the human
    Robot Emissary (from the animation “Animatrix”) Robot Doppelganger (Germinoid, by Hiroshi Ishiguro (right) )
  • 16. 1.4. Why Socially Interactive Robots? (2/3)
    • People want robots have social skills
      • develop their interaction skills themselves (learning machine)
      • support a wide range of users
      • Can be a part of single person’s life
    SAIL and Dav, Self-organizing Autonomous Incremental Learner
  • 17. 1.4. Why Socially Interactive Robots? (3/3)
    • So, robot designers try to…
      • Embed models of social behavior of humans in the robot
      • increase robot’s effectiveness
      • … for the robot as “natural” interaction partners
    Bender, your drinking partner (from the animation “Futurama”) Marvin, the paranoid android (from the movie “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”)
  • 18. Chapter2. Methodology 4 th Team Human Robot Interaction
  • 19. 2.1. Design Approaches Robot Shape Anthropomorphic Robot (Human-like interaction) Zoomorphic Robot (Creature-like interaction) Robot Feature Faces Speech Recognition Lip-Reading Skill Social Capacities Human Social Expectation enjoyable, feeling empowered, competent interaction
  • 20. 2.1. Design Approaches Biologically-inspired Robot Socially Intelligent Socially Interactive Functionally-designed Robot Functionally Structured Socially Interactive Design Methodology How are socially interactive robots built?
  • 21. 2.1.1. Biologically Inspired Robot - Cognitive, behavioral, motivational motor - Perceptual system - Primary Concepts - 1. Naturalistic Embodiment -> “life-like” activity 2. Direct Examination about basic scientific theories COG (MIT/ general purpose humanoid platform) Anthropology Structure of Interaction Cognitive Science Developmental Psychology Theory of Mind Ethology Interdisciplinary Research Sociology
  • 22. 2.1.1. Biologically Inspired Robot
    • Ethology
      • Observational study of animals in the natural setting
      • Natural types of activity -> life-like robot
      • Ex) AIBO
    • Structure of Interaction
      • Analysis of interactional structure
      • -> Key interaction patterns
      • -> Focus design of perception & cognition systems
      • Ex) ROBITA : Turn-Taking in dialogue
  • 23. 2.1.1. Biologically Inspired Robot
    • Theory of Mind ( 마음과학 )
      • Ex) Joint attention ( 상호주의하기 , selective attention to the object of mutual interest) -> gaze direction, pointing gestures
    • Developmental Psychology
      • Effective mechanism for creating robots that engage in natural social exchanges (dialogue)
      • Ex) Kismet’s “synthetic nervous system” <- Proto-conversational skill of human three-month infants with their caregiver (initiation, mutual-orientation, greeting, play-dialog, disengagement)
  • 24. 2.1.2. Functionally designed Robot Functionally Structured He is so intelligent and emotional!!! Socially Intelligent Functionally Designed Robot - Constrained operational and performance objectives Ex) restaurant robot - greeting, serving, cleaning… - Certain effects and experiences with the user Ex) greeting – joy serving – happiness mistake – sadness … function1 = happiness function2 = sadness function3 = anger function4 = fear
  • 25. 2.1.2. Functionally designed Robot
    • Motivations for functional design
      • Physical Limitation
        • Short-term interaction
        • Limited quality of interaction
        • Limited embodiment and capability of a robot
        • Constraint by the environment
      • Effects of Functional Design
        • Affordances (action possibilities) and usability can be improved even with the limited social expression. (recorded or scripted speech)
        • Artificial designs can provide compelling interaction. (video games and electronic toys)
  • 26. 2.1.2. Functionally designed Robot
    • Often Used Techniques
      • HCI
        • Robots are being developed using HCI tech.
        • cognitive modeling, contextual inquiry, heuristic evaluation, empirical user testing
      • Systems Engineering
        • Critical-path elements of design -> Effective and facilitated development and operation
        • Ex) A robot in highly structure domain needs navigation skills most importantly.
  • 27. 2.1.2. Functionally designed Robot
    • Often Used Techniques (continues)
      • Iterative Design
        • The process of revising a design through a series of test and redesign cycles
        • Ex) Willeke’s museum robots – design based on the lessons from preceding generations
  • 28. 2.2. Design Issues
    • Traditional Robot Design issues
      • Cognition- planning and decision making
      • Environment sensing and navigation
      • Actuation- mobility and manipulation
      • Interface, Inputs and display
      • System dynamics- control architecture, electro mechanics
  • 29. 2.2. Design Issues
    • Social Interaction Issues
    • Human oriented perception
      • Detecting and organizing gestures
      • Monitoring and classifying activity
      • Discerning intent
      • Measuring the feedback from human peers
    • Natural Human Robot Interaction
      • Believable behavior
      • Keep up with social norms
  • 30. 2.2. Design Issues
    • Social Interaction Issues
    • Readable social cues
      • Useful for expression and easy interaction
      • Social cues should be easy to understand
      • Expression, gestures or voice could be adopted
    • Real-Time performance
      • Should operate at human interaction rates
  • 31. 2.3. Embodiment
    • Concept of Embodiment
      • Extend to which a system can perturb the environment and get perturbed by the environment defines embodiment
      • Also looked upon as the complexity of interaction with the environment
      • The number of modes of interaction with the environment can also be a measure of the same
  • 32. 2.3.1. Morphology 2.3.3. Anthropomorphic 2.3.4. Zoomorphic
    • Factors affecting the impact and acceptance of a design
    • Morphology
      • Physical form has a great influence on the desirability, expressiveness and accessibility of a robot.
    • Anthropomorphic
      • Resembling human in form makes peer interaction easier and stronger.
      • Interaction with familiar forms are easier.
      • Appropriate balance of visual illusion and interactive functionality.
    • Zoomorphic
      • Entertainment robots and toy robots.
      • Avoiding Uncanny valley is easier as expectation is lower
  • 33. 2.3.2. Design Considerations
    • If its meant to do tasks for humanness it should portray product ness
    • If its meant for peer interaction Human ness is important
    • A considerable amount of robot ness should be maintained so as to prevent excess confidence in the robot’s abilities
    • A specific amount of familiarity is to be provided remembering the concept of uncanny valley
  • 34. 2.3.5. Caricatured 2.3.6. Functional
    • Caricatured
      • Its not essential to be realistic to be believable
      • But it can be used to focus or distract attention on to or away from certain robotic features.
    • Functionality – (Should be the primary concern)
      • Embodiment should reflect the task to be performed
      • Health care robots will have handles and carriage space
      • Toy robots should be cheap attractive and durable.
  • 35. 2.4. Emotion
    • Emotions play a significant role
      • In human behavior
      • Communication
      • Interaction
    • Theories used to describe emotions
      • Discrete categories
      • Continuous scales or basis dimensions
      • Componential theory: categories + dimensions
    • Why emotion is important?
      • People tend to treat computer as they treat other people
    Happy Sad Frustrated positive valence negative valence high arousal low arousal open stance closed stance
  • 36. 2.4.1. Artificial emotion
    • Artificial emotion used in social robots
      • Emotion helps HRI
      • Provide feedback to user
      • Act as a control mechanism
    • How robot display emotion?
      • From small DOF to many DOF
      • Kismet
  • 37. 2.4.2. Emotions as control mechanism
    • Determine control priority
      • Different behavior mode
      • Trigger learning and adaptation
    • Example – Sage
      • Person blocking Sage’s path
    [frustrated] “I am giving a tour to these visitors right now. Please let me continue!” [happy] playful and enticing, engaging the visitor and inviting the person on a tour
  • 38. 2.4.3. Speech
    • Emotional speech
      • Effective method for communicating
      • Parameters
        • Loudness
        • Pitch: level, variation, range
        • Prosody
    • Kismet’s vocalization system
  • 39.
    • Shortage of facial expression
      • Limitation of mechanical design
        • Abrupt change  rarely occurs in nature
    • Mechanical approach
      • Varies with DOF of actuators
      • Feelix, Kismet, Saya
    • Computer grahpic approach
      • Vikia
    2.4.4. Facial Expression fear surprise anger neutral sadness happy
  • 40. 2.4.5 Body language
    • Importance of body language
      • 90% of gesture occur during speech
      • Strong tendency to be cued by body language
    • Emotional body movements
      • Anger
      • Fear
      • Happiness
      • Sadness
      • Surprise
  • 41. Thank You ! Human Robot Interaction