Abstract
Safe navigation is a fundamental capability for robots that move among pedestrians. The traditional approach in robotics to attain such a capability has treated pedestrians as moving obstacles and provides algorithms that assure collision-free motion in the presence of such moving obstacles. In contrast, recent studies have focused on providing the robot not only collision-free motion but also a socially acceptable behavior by planning the robot’s path to maintain a “social distance” from pedestrians and respect their personal space. Such a social behavior is perceived as natural by the pedestrians and thus provides them a comfortable feeling, even if it may be considered a decorative element from a strictly safety oriented perspective. In this work we develop a system that realizes human-like collision avoidance in a mobile robot. In order to achieve this goal, we use a pedestrian model from human science literature, a version of the popular Social Force Model that was specifically designed to reproduce conditions similar to those found in shopping malls and other pedestrians facilities. Our findings show that the proposed system, which we tested in 2-h field trials in a real world environment, not only is perceived as comfortable by pedestrians but also yields safer navigation than traditional collision-free methods, since it better fits the behavior of the other pedestrians in the crowd.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Burgard W, Cremers AB, Fox D, Hänel D, Lakemeyer G, Schulz D, Steiner W, Thrun S (1998) The interactive museum tour-guide robot. In: Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp 11–18
Thrun S, Bennewitz M, Burgard W, Cremers AB, Dellaert F, Fox D, Hahnel D, Rosenberg C, Roy N, Schulte J, Schulz D (1999) Minerva: a second-generation museum tour-guide robot. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp 1999–2005
Gross H-M, Boehme H, Schroeter C, Mueller S, Koenig A, Einhorn E, Martin C, Merten M, Bley A (2009) TOOMAS: interactive shopping guide robots in everyday use—final implementation and experiences from long-term field trials. In: Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp 2005–2012
Huttenrauch H, Eklundh KS (2002) Fetch-and-Carry with Cero: observations from a long-term user study with a service robot. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp 158–163
Fox D, Burgard W, Thruny S (1997) The dynamic window approach to collision avoidance. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 4(1):23–33
Stachniss C, Burgard W (2002) An integrated approach to goal-directed obstacle avoidance under dynamic constraints for dynamic environments. In: Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp 508–513
Seder M, Petrovic I (2007) Dynamic window based approach to mobile robot motion control in the presence of moving obstacles. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp 1986–1992
Belkhouche F (Aug. 2009) Reactive path planning in a dynamic environment. IEEE Trans Robot 25(4):902–911
Goller M, Steinhardt F, Kerscher T, Zollner JM, Dillmann R (2010) Proactive Avoidance of moving obstacles for a service robot utilizing a behavior-based control. In: Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp 5984–5989
Luber M, Stork JA, Tipaldi GD, Arras KO (2010) People tracking with human motion predictions from social forces. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp 464–469
Ellis D, Sommerlade E, Reid I (2010) Modelling Pedestrian Trajectories with Gaussian Processes. In: Proceedings of International Workshop on Visual Surveillance, pp 1229–1234
Ziebart BD, Ratliff N, Gallagher G, Mertz C, Peterson K (2009) Planning-based prediction for pedestrians, In: Proceedings of 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp 3931–3936
Zanlungo F, Ikeda T, Kanda T (2011) Social force model with explicit collision prediction. Europhys Lett 93:68005
Sisbot EA, Marin-Urias LF, Alami R, Simeon T (2007) A human aware mobile robot motion planner. IEEE Trans Robot 23(5):875–883
Pacchierotti E, Christensen HI, Jensfelt P (2006) Evaluation of passing distance for social robots. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Work on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp 315–320
Albert Wu, Jonathan PJ (2012) Guaranteed infinite horizon avoidance of unpredictable, dynamically constrained obstacles. Auton Robot 32(3):227–242
Lu Yibiao, Huo Xiaoming, Arslan O, Tsiotras P (2011) Incremental Multi-Scale Search Algorithm for Dynamic Path Planning. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B 41(6):1556–1570
Henry P, Vollmer C, Ferris B, Fox D (2010) Learning to navigate through crowded environments. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp 981–986
Tamura Y, Fukuzawa T, Asama H (2010) Smooth collision avoidance in human-robot coexisting environment. In: Proceedings of IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent robots and systems, pp 3887–3892
Ratsamee P, Mae Y, Ohara K, Takubo T, Arai T (2013) Human-robot collision avoidance using a modified social force model with body pose and face orientation. Int J Hum Robot 10(1):1350008
Hall ET (1969) The hidden dimension. Anchor Books, New York
Walters ML, Dautenhahn K, Boekhorst R, Koay KL, Kaouri C, Woods S, Nehaniv C, Lee D, Werry I (2005) The influence of subjects’ personality traits on personal spatial zones in a human-robot interaction experiment. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp 347–352
Michalowski MP, Sabanovic S, Simmons R (2006) A spatial model of engagement for a social robot. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Workshop on advanced motion control, pp 762–767
Kirby R, Simmons R, Forlizzi J (2009) COMPANION: a constraint optimizing method for person-acceptable navigation. In: IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)
Pandey AK, Alami R (2010) A framework towards a socially aware mobile robot motion in human-centered dynamic environment. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)
Qian K, Ma X, Dai X, Fang F (2010) Socially acceptable pre-collision safety strategies for human-compliant navigation of service robots. Adv Robot 24(13):1813–1840
Lichtenthaeler C., Lorenz T., Kirsch A. (2012) Influence of Legibility on Perceived Safety in a Virtual Human-Robot Path Crossing Task. In: IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)
Rios-Martinez J, Renzaglia A, Spalanzani A, Martinelli A, Laugier C (2012) Navigating between people: a stochastic optimization approach. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)
Luber M, Spinello L, Silva J, Arras KO (2012) Socially-aware robot navigation: a learning approach. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)
Fraichard T (2007) A Shorth Paper about Motion Safety. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)
Glas DF, Miyashita T, Ishiguro H, Hagita N (2009) Laser-based tracking of human position and orientation using parametric shape modeling. Adv Robot 23(4):405–428
Van den Berg J, Ling M, Manocha D (2008) Reciprocal velocity obstacles for real-time multi-agent navigation. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)
Bennewitz M, Burgard W, Cielniak G, Thrun S (2005) Learning motion patterns of people for compliant robot motion. Int J Robot Res 24(1):31–48
Ziebart BD, Ratliff N, Gallagher G, Mertz C Peterson K (2009) Planning-Based Prediction for Pedestrians. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp 3931–3936
Trautman P, Krause A (2010) Unfreezing the Robot: navigation in Dense, Interacting Crowds. In: IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, pp 797–803
Helbing D, Farkas IJ, Molnar P, Vicsek T (2002) Simulation of pedestrian crowds in normal and evacuation situations. Pedestr Evac Dyn 21:31–58
Moussaïd M, Helbing D, Garnier S, Johansson A, Combe M, Theraulaz G (2009) Experimental study of the behavioural mechanisms underlying self-organization in human crowds. Proc R Soc B 276:2755–2762
Curtis S, Zafar B, Gutub B, Manocha D (2012) Right of way. Vis Comput 25:1–16
Moussaïd M, Perozo N, Garnier S, Helbing D, Theraulaz G (2010) The walking behaviour of pedestrian social groups and its impact on crowd dynamics. PLoS One 5(4):e10047
Zanlungo F, Ikeda T, Kanda T (2012) A microscopic social norm model to obtain realistic macroscopic velocity and density pedestrian distributions. PLoS One 7(12):e50720
Zanlungo F, Ikeda T, Kanda T (2014) Potential for the dynamics of pedestrians in a socially interacting group. Phys Rev E 89(1):021811
Kidokoro H, Kanda T, Brščic D, Shiomi M (2012) Will I bother here?: a robot anticipating its influence on pedestrian walking comfort. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE international conference on Human-robot, interaction, pp 259–266
Guy SJ, Curtis S, Lin MC, Manocha D (2012) Least-effort trajectories lead to emergent crowd behaviors. Phys Rev E 85(1):016110
Kanda T, Miyashita T, Osada T, Haikawa Y, Ishiguro H (2008) Analysis of humanoid appearances in human-robot interaction. IEEE Trans Robot 24(3):725–735
Helbing D, Molnar P (2009) Social force model for pedestrian dynamics. Phys Rev E 51:4282–4286 (Belkhouche F, 1995)
Helbing D, Farkas I, Vicsek T (2000) Simulating dynamical features of escape panic. Nature 407:487–490
Helbing D, Johansson A (2010) Pedestrian, Crowd and Evacuation Dynamics. Encycl Complex Syst Sci 16:6476–6495
Reynolds CW (1999) Steering behaviors for autonomous characters. Game Developers Conf 1061:763–782
Lämmel G, Plaue M (2012) Getting out of the way: collision avoiding pedestrian models compared to the real world. Pedestr Evac Dyn 2014:1275–1289
Acknowledgments
We thank the staff of the Asia and Pacific Trade Center for their cooperation and ATR’s Yoshifumi Nakagawa for his help. We also thank the anonymous reviewers whose comments helped us to improve the quality of our paper. This work was supported by JST, CREST.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix: Background Work: Collision Prediction Social Force Model
Appendix: Background Work: Collision Prediction Social Force Model
1.1 Model Definition
Models of pedestrian collision-avoidance have been developed since the 50 s to deepen understanding of crowd dynamics and design better facilities. The Social Force Model (SFM) [45] is a popular pedestrian model that describes the behavior of pedestrians in a crowd through reaction forces inspired by physics. More than a single model, SFM may be considered as a framework in which the acceleration of a pedestrian \(i\) is given by
Here \({\varvec{v}}_i(t)\) is the pedestrian velocity at time \(t,\,{\varvec{v}}_i^0\) is the pedestrian’s preferred velocity, a vector directed towards the current pedestrian sub-goal and whose magnitude corresponds to the velocity the pedestrian is more comfortable walking at, while \(\tau \) is the relaxation time to recover the preferred velocity (\(0.66\; \hbox {s}^{-1}\) in [13]). The actual avoidance behavior is determined by the interaction term with the other pedestrians \(j\) in the environment, \({\varvec{f}}_{i,j}\), whose precise form determines the SFM specification. The original Circular Specification (CS) of the model was determined by symmetrical repulsive forces as
where \({\varvec{d}}_{i,j}\) is the distance between the pedestrians, \(A\) is the maximum interaction intensity and \(B\) determines how the intensity changes with \(d\). The model is popular for its simplicity, and it works well at the high densities that describe the egress conditions it has been developed for [46], but it fails in describing lower density regimes and for this reason a few improved specifications, taking in account relative velocities in the computation of \({\varvec{f}}_{i,j}\), have been proposed [47].
Zanlungo et al. [13] compare a few of these specifications to the CP specification that they propose. This model, that develops on ideas originating from Reynold’s boid model [48], uses the relative velocity between the pedestrians to compute how their “future” distance \({\varvec{d}}'_{i,j}\) will vary with time according to the hypothesis that the pedestrians will keep a constant velocity. The time at which the projected distance \(d'_{i,j}\) assumes a minimum value is called the “interaction time” \(t_i\) for pedestrian \(i\) and the value of the corresponding future distance \({\varvec{d}}'_{i,j}(t_i)\) (see Fig. 11) replaces the current distance in the equation for the CS specification force (2) in order to obtain the CP specification equation
Here the term \(v_i/t_i\) is introduced to modulate the force in such a way that the pedestrian is able to stop in time \(t_i\). According to the analysis of [13], the CP-SFM model outperforms the previous SFM specifications in simulating pedestrian collision avoidance in low and average density multi-person settings, a characteristics that makes this model suitable to robot applications.
[49] compares the performance of CP to other popular pedestrian methods for egress oriented applications.
1.2 Model Calibration
To calibrate and evaluate the CP-SFM model, [13] uses a set of pedestrian trajectories obtained in a controlled experiment to which eight subjects took part. Each subject was given a start and goal point, and was prescribed to walk as naturally as possible towards the goal. The trajectories of pedestrians were tracked in a square area with an 8 meters side. The start and goal points were decided in such a way that the trajectories of all pedestrians will converge, if walking straight to the goal, at the center of the experimental area, creating a potentially complex collision avoiding problem; but the density of the environment was low enough to allow the pedestrians to freely choose their avoidance strategy. The calibration process used a genetic algorithm to minimize a fitness function that consisted in the average distance between the simulated and actual trajectories of pedestrians plus a penalty term assigned to those trajectories that “collided” between them (more exactly, trajectories that reached a minimum distance smaller than the distance between any pair of actual pedestrians during the experiment). The genetic algorithm used 500 genomes per generation, over 1,000 different generations; tournament selection over a pool of five solutions, crossover and random Gaussian mutation with probability 0.1. The solution was determined through 50 independent runs of the algorithm. The CP-SFM method outperformed all the other specifications with an average position error of \(30 \pm 1\) centimeters (\(55 \pm 1\) for CS-SFM).
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Shiomi, M., Zanlungo, F., Hayashi, K. et al. Towards a Socially Acceptable Collision Avoidance for a Mobile Robot Navigating Among Pedestrians Using a Pedestrian Model. Int J of Soc Robotics 6, 443–455 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0238-y
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-014-0238-y