scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Book ChapterDOI

From Tools to Teammates: Joint Activity in Human-Agent-Robot Teams

TL;DR: Some of the challenges and requirements for successful coordination are discussed, and briefly how the KAoS HART services framework has been used to support coordination in a multi-team human-robot field exercise.
Abstract: Coordination is an essential ingredient of joint activity in human-agent-robot teams. In this paper, we discuss some of the challenges and requirements for successful coordination, and briefly how we have used KAoS HART services framework to support coordination in a multi-team human-robot field exercise.

Content maybe subject to copyright    Report

Citations
More filters
Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: In this article, the authors investigate the presumed human-centeredness of Society 5.0 by comparing its makeup with that of earlier societies and show that all six categories of prospective human and non-human members have analogues in earlier societies.
Abstract: The Government of Japan’s “Society 5.0” initiative aims to create a cyber-physical society in which (among other things) citizens’ daily lives will be enhanced through increasingly close collaboration with artificially intelligent systems. However, an apparent paradox lies at the heart of efforts to create a more “human-centered” society in which human beings will live alongside a proliferating array of increasingly autonomous social robots and embodied AI. This study seeks to investigate the presumed human-centeredness of Society 5.0 by comparing its makeup with that of earlier societies. By distinguishing “technological” and “non-technological” processes of posthumanization and applying a phenomenological anthropological model, this study demonstrates: (1) how the diverse types of human and non-human members expected to participate in Society 5.0 differ qualitatively from one another; (2) how the dynamics that will shape the membership of Society 5.0 can be conceptualized; and (3) how the anticipated membership of Society 5.0 differs from that of Societies 1.0 through 4.0. This study describes six categories of prospective human and non-human members of Society 5.0 and shows that all six have analogues in earlier societies, which suggests that social scientific analysis of past societies may shed unexpected light on the nature of Society 5.0.

130 citations

Book ChapterDOI
15 Jul 2018
TL;DR: A perceptual-cognitive explanation (PeCoX) framework for the development of explanations that address both the perceptual and cognitive foundations of an agent’s behavior, distinguishing between explanation generation, communication and reception is proposed.
Abstract: Most explainable AI (XAI) research projects focus on well-delineated topics, such as interpretability of machine learning outcomes, knowledge sharing in a multi-agent system or human trust in agent’s performance. For the development of explanations in human-agent teams, a more integrative approach is needed. This paper proposes a perceptual-cognitive explanation (PeCoX) framework for the development of explanations that address both the perceptual and cognitive foundations of an agent’s behavior, distinguishing between explanation generation, communication and reception. It is a generic framework (i.e., the core is domain-agnostic and the perceptual layer is model-agnostic), and being developed and tested in the domains of transport, health-care and defense. The perceptual level entails the provision of an Intuitive Confidence Measure and the identification of the “foil” in a contrastive explanation. The cognitive level entails the selection of the beliefs, goals and emotions for explanations. Ontology Design Patterns are being constructed for the reasoning and communication, whereas Interaction Design Patterns are being constructed for the shaping of the multimodal communication. First results show (1) positive effects on human’s understanding of the perceptual and cognitive foundation of agent’s behavior, and (2) the need for harmonizing the explanations to the context and human’s information processing capabilities.

61 citations

Proceedings ArticleDOI
07 Mar 2016
TL;DR: The authors' results suggest that drivers were able to interpret simple trajectory intentions, such as a lane change, conveyed by the driving agent, however, the drivingAgent was not able to effectively communicate more nuanced, higher level ideas such as availability, primarily due to the steering wheel being the control mechanism.
Abstract: Automated driving systems that share control with human drivers by using haptic feedback through the steering wheel have been shown to have advantages over fully automated systems and manual driving. Here, we describe an experiment to elicit tacit expectations of behavior from such a system. A gaming steering wheel electronically coupled to the steering wheel in a full-car driving simulator allows two participants to share control of the vehicle. One participant was asked to use the gaming wheel to act as the automated driving agent while another participant acted as the car driver. The course provided different information and visuals to the driving agent and the driver to simulate possible automation failures and conflict situations between automation and the driver. The driving agent was also given prompts that specified a communicative goal at various points along the course. Both participants were interviewed before and after the drive, and vehicle data and drive video were collected. Our results suggest that drivers were able to interpret simple trajectory intentions, such as a lane change, conveyed by the driving agent. However, the driving agent was not able to effectively communicate more nuanced, higher level ideas such as availability, primarily due to the steering wheel being the control mechanism. Torque on the steering wheel without warning was seen most often as a failure of automation. Gentle and steady steering movements were viewed more favorably.

56 citations


Cites background from "From Tools to Teammates: Joint Acti..."

  • ...In a partially automated vehicle, the driver and the computer are part of a human-robot team whose members need to share goals[1] and mental models, know their roles and fulfill them, and trust each other appropriately [2][3]....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
TL;DR: The design of interfaces that support users in working with free-flying robots to accomplish tasks including inventory logistics and management, environmental data collection, and visual inspection are explored and the utility of a data-driven design process is demonstrated.
Abstract: Robots are becoming increasingly prevalent and are already providing assistance in a variety of activities, ranging from space exploration to domestic housework. Recent advances in the design of sensors, motors, and microelectromechanical systems have enabled the development of a new class of small aerial robots. These free-flying robots hold great promise in assisting humans by acting as mobile sensor platforms to collect data in areas that are difficult to access or infeasible to instrument. In this work, we explored the design of interfaces that support users in working with free-flying robots to accomplish tasks including inventory logistics and management, environmental data collection, and visual inspection. Extending prior work in control interfaces for ground robots, we conducted a formative study in order to identify key design requirements for free-flyer interfaces. We designed several realistic tasks for use in evaluating human-robot interaction within the context of indoor free-flyer operation. We implemented three prototype interfaces that each provide varying degrees of support in enabling remote users to work with a flying robot to plan, communicate goals, accomplish tasks, and respond to changes in a dynamic environment. An experimental evaluation of each interface found that the interface designed to support collaborative planning and replanning using an interactive timeline and three-dimensional spatial waypoints significantly improved users' efficiency in accomplishing tasks, their ability to intervene in response to spontaneous changes in task demands, and their ratings of the robot as a teammate compared to interfaces that support low-level teleoperation or waypoint-based supervisory control. Our results demonstrate the utility of a data-driven design process and show the need for free-flyer interfaces to consider planning phases in addition to task execution. In addition, we demonstrate the importance of providing interface support for interrupting robot operations as unplanned events arise.

48 citations


Cites background from "From Tools to Teammates: Joint Acti..."

  • ...User perception of free-flyers may be an interesting avenue for future research to explore, as prior work has indicated that such mental model formation affects human–robot coordination and joint activity (Bradshaw et al., 2009)....

    [...]

Journal ArticleDOI
01 Apr 2011
TL;DR: This paper focuses on teams composed of human-agent pairs and develops a system called Shared Mental Models for all - SMMall, which implements a hidden Markov model (HMM)-based cognitive load model for an agent to predict its human partner's instantaneous cognitive load status.
Abstract: Recent research on human-centered teamwork highly demands the design of cognitive agents that can model and exploit human partners' cognitive load to enhance team performance. In this paper, we focus on teams composed of human-agent pairs and develop a system called Shared Mental Models for all - SMMall. SMMall implements a hidden Markov model (HMM)-based cognitive load model for an agent to predict its human partner's instantaneous cognitive load status. It also implements a user interface (UI) concept called shared belief map, which offers a synergic representation of team members' information space and allows them to share beliefs. An experiment was conducted to evaluate the HMM-based load models. The results indicate that the HMM-based load models are effective in helping team members develop a shared mental model (SMM), and the benefit of load-based information sharing becomes more significant as communication capacity increases. It also suggests that multiparty communication plays an important role in forming/evolving team SMMs, and when a group of agents can be partitioned into subteams, splitting messages by their load status can be more effective for developing subteam SMMs.

39 citations

References
More filters
Book ChapterDOI

13,767 citations

Book ChapterDOI
01 Jan 2005
TL;DR: For instance, Grice was interested in Quine's logical approach to language, although he differed from Quine over certain specific specific questions, such as the viability of the distinction between analytic and synthetic statements.
Abstract: As Grice’s enthusiasm for ordinary language philosophy became increasingly qualified during the 1950s, his interest was growing in the rather different styles of philosophy of language then current in America. Recent improvements in communications had made possible an exchange of ideas across the Atlantic that would have been unthinkable before the war. W. V. O. Quine had made a considerable impression at Oxford during his time as Eastman Professor. Grice was interested in Quine’s logical approach to language, although he differed from him over certain specific questions, such as the viability of the distinction between analytic and synthetic statements. Quine, who was visiting England for a whole year, and who brought with him clothes, books and even provisions in the knowledge that rationing was still in force, travelled by ship.1 However, during the same decade the rapid proliferation of passenger air travel enabled movement of academics between Britain and America for even short stays and lecture tours. Grice himself made a number of such visits, and was impressed by the formal and theory-driven philosophy he encountered. Most of all he was impressed by the work of Noam Chomsky.

6,984 citations


"From Tools to Teammates: Joint Acti..." refers result in this paper

  • ...In contrast to Asimov’s laws of robotics—and similar in spirit to Grice’s famous maxims [12]—the objective of KAoS teamwork policies is not principally to prevent harm but rather, in a positive vein, to facilitate helpful interaction among teammates....

    [...]

Book ChapterDOI
01 Jan 1991
TL;DR: The issues taken up here are: coordination of content, coordination of process, and how to update their common ground moment by moment.
Abstract: GROUNDING It takes two people working together to play a duet, shake hands, play chess, waltz, teach, or make love. To succeed, the two of them have to coordinate both the content and process of what they are doing. Alan and Barbara, on the piano, must come to play the same Mozart duet. This is coordination of content. They must also synchronize their entrances and exits, coordinate how loudly to play forte and pianissimo, and otherwise adjust to each other's tempo and dynamics. This is coordination of process. They cannot even begin to coordinate on content without assuming a vast amount of shared information or common ground-that is, mutual knowledge, mutual beliefs, and mutual assumptions And to coordinate on process, they need to update their common ground moment by moment. All collective actions are built on common ground and its accumulation. We thank many colleagues for discussion of the issues we take up here.

4,144 citations


"From Tools to Teammates: Joint Acti..." refers background in this paper

  • ...• Common ground: Common ground refers to the pertinent mutual knowledge, beliefs, and assumptions that support interdependent actions in the context of a given joint activity [8]....

    [...]

Book
01 Oct 1991
TL;DR: This volume argues that the authors' thinking is shaped by others in a process known as socially shared cognition, and contains reports on the way thought works, from investigators in psychology, social psychology, anthropology, sociology, linguistics and literature.
Abstract: This volume contains reports on the way thought works, from investigators in psychology, social psychology, anthropology, sociology, linguistics and literature. It argues that our thinking is shaped by others in a process known as socially shared cognition.

2,836 citations

MonographDOI
01 Jan 1996

2,737 citations