Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Socio-Contextual Constraints for Human Approach with a Mobile Robot

  • Published:
International Journal of Social Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The efficiency of human-robot collaborative task completion benefits from seamless interactions. Robots that act in a shared environment with humans, can improve the initiation of such interactions by externalizing the intention of accompanying motions. Especially within robot locomotion the ability to convey intentions non-verbally is beneficial for interaction initiation and thus for mutual collision avoidance and the reduction of interferences. This work examines specific trajectory features that provide the required natural movements and support intention conveyance. The named correlations are investigated in the social context of robot locomotion for a pro-active robot-to-human approach. Trajectories that aim to clearly convey this intention of the robot are planned based on optimal control principles. Within a subject study different features like path shape and orientation for robot-to-human approach trajectories are evaluated in their performance of supporting intention conveyance. Results show that the perceived naturalness and the comprehensibility of robot-to-human approach motions is significantly higher for trajectories with human-like features.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Albrecht S, Basili P, Glasauer S, Leibold (Sobotka) M, Ulbrich M (2012) Modeling and analysis of human navigation with crossing interferer using inverse optimal control. In: International conference on mathematical modelling, pp. 158–163

  2. Alempijevic A, Fitch R, Kirchner N (2013) Bootstrapping navigation and path planning using human positional traces. In: International conference on robotics and automation, pp. 1242–1247

  3. Arechavaleta G, Laumond J, Hicheur H, Berthoz A (2006) The nonholonomic nature of human locomotion: a modeling study. In: International conference on biomedical robotics and biomechatronics, pp. 158–163

  4. Avrunin E, Simmons R (2013) Using human approach paths to improve social navigation. In: International conference on human-robot interaction, pp. 73–74

  5. Basili P, Huber M, Kourakos O, Lorenz T, Brandt T, Hirche S, Glasauer S (2012) Inferring the goal of an approaching agent: A human-robot study. In: International workshop on robots and human interactive communications, pp. 527–532

  6. Bergström N, Kanda T, Miyashita T, Ishiguro H, Hagita N (2008) Modeling of natural human-robot encounters. In: International conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp. 2623–2629

  7. Bitgood S, Dukes S (2006) Not another step! economy of movement and pedestrian choice point behavior in shopping malls. Environ Behav 38(3):394–405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. de Borst AW, de Gelder B (2015) Is it the real deal? Perception of virtual characters versus humans: an affective cognitive neuroscience perspective. Front Psychol 6:576

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Breazeal C, Kidd C, Thomaz A, Hoffman G, Berlin M (2005) Effects of nonverbal communication on efficiency and robustness in human-robot teamwork. In: International conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp. 708–713

  10. Buss M, Carton D, Gonsior B, Kuehnlenz K, Landsiedel C, Mitsou N, de Nijs R, Zlotowski J, Sosnowski S, Strasser E et al (2011) Towards proactive human-robot interaction in human environments. In: International conference on cognitive infocommunications, pp. 1–6

  11. Buss M et al (2015) Iuro – Soziale Mensch-Roboter-Interaktion in den Straßen von München. at – Automatisierungstechnik

  12. Caplan M, Goldman M (1981) Personal space violations as a function of height. J Psychol 114:167–171

    Google Scholar 

  13. Caraian S, Kirchner N, Colborne-Veel P (2015) Moderating a robot’s ability to influence people through its level of socio-contextual interactivity. In: International conference on human-robot interaction, pp. 149–156

  14. Carton D, Turnwald A, Wollherr D, Buss M (2012) Proactively approaching pedestrians with an autonomous mobile robot in urban environments. In: International symposium on experimental robotics, Springer, pp 199–214

  15. Carton D, Turnwald A, Olszowy W, Wollherr D, Buss M (2014) Using penalized spline regression to calculate mean trajectories including confidence intervals of human motion data. In: Workshop on advanced robotics and its social impacts, pp. 76–81

  16. Chiovetto E, Mukovskiy A, Reinhart FR, Khansari-Zadeh SM, Billard A, Steil JJ, Giese MA (2014) Assessment of human-likeness and naturalness of interceptive arm reaching movement accomplished by a humanoid robot. In: European conference on visual perception

  17. Choi JW, Curry R, Elkaim GH (2010) Piecewise bezier curves path planning with continuous curvature constraint for autonomous driving. In: Machine learning and systems engineering, pp 31–45

  18. Csibra G, Gergely G (2007) Obsessed with goals: functions and mechanisims of teleological interpretation of action in humans. Acta Psychol 124(1):60–78

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dragan A, Srinivasa S (2013) Generating legible motion. In: Robotics: science and systems

  20. Dragan A, Srinivasa S (2014) Familiarization to robot motion. In: International conference on human-robot interaction, pp 366–373

  21. Dragan A, Bauman S, Forlizzi J, Srinivasa S (2015) Effects of robot motion on human-robot collaboration. In: International conference on human-robot interaction, pp. 51–58

  22. Duffy BR (2003) Anthropomorphism and the social robot. Robot Auton Syst Socially Interact Robot 42(3):177–190

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Fajen B, Warren W (2007) Behavioral dynamics of intercepting a moving target. Exp Brain Res 180:303–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Friedman M (1937) The use of ranks to avoid the assumption of normality implicit in the analysis of variance. J Am Stat Assoc 32(200):675–701

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  25. Garrell A, Villamizar M, Moreno-Noguer F, Sanfeliu A (2013) Proactive behavior of an autonomous mobile robot for human-assisted learning. In: International workshop on robots and human interactive communications, pp 107–113

  26. Gielniak MJ, Liu CK, Thomaz AL (2013) Generating human-like motion for robots. Int J Robot Res 32(11):1275–1301

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hall ET (1966) The hidden dimension: man’s use of space in public and private. The Bodley Head Ltd, London

    Google Scholar 

  28. Hartnett J, Bailey K, Hartley C (1974) Body height, position, and sex as determinants of personal space. J Psychol 87:129–136

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hicheur H, Pham Q, Arechavaleta G, Laumond J, Berthoz A (2007) The formation of trajectories during goal-oriented locomotion in humans. i. a. stereotyped behaviour. Eur J Neurosci 26(8):2376–2390

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Houska B, Ferreau HJ, Diehl M (2011) Acado toolkit - an open-source framework for automatic control and dynamic optimization. Optim Control Appl Methods 32:298–312

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. Kanayama Y, Kimura Y, Miyazaki F, Noguchi T (1990) A stable tracking control method for an autonomous mobile robot. In: International conference on robotics and automation, pp 384–389

  32. Kanda T, Glas D, Shiomi M, Ishiguro H, Hagita N (2008) Who will be the customer?: a social robot that anticipates people’s behavior from their trajectories. In: International conference on ubuquitous computing, pp 380–389

  33. Kato Y, Kanda T, Ishiguro H (2015) May i help you?: Design of human-like polite approaching behavior. In: International conference on human-robot interaction, pp 35–42

  34. Koay K, Walters M, Dautenhahn K (2005) Methodological issues using a comfort level device in human-robot interactions. In: International workshop on robot and human interactive communication, pp 359–364

  35. Koay K, Dautenhahn K, Woods S, Walters M (2006) Empirical results from using a comfort level device in human-robot interaction studies. In: ACM conference on human-robot interaction, pp 194–201

  36. Koay K, Syrdal D, Ashgari-Oskoei M, Walters ML, Dautenhahn K (2014) Social roles and baseline proxemic preferences for a domestic service robot. Int J Soc Robot 6(4):469–488

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Lammer L, Huber A, Weiss A, Vincze M (2014) Mutual care: How older adults react when they should help their care robot. In: International symposium on new frontiers in human robot interaction - AISB, Goldsmiths, University of London, pp 69–76

  38. LaValle SM (2006) Planning algorithms. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  39. Lichtenthäler C, Kirsch A (2013) Towards legible robot navigation-how to increase the intend expressiveness of robot navigation behavior. ICSR

  40. Lichtenthäler C, Lorenz T, Kirsch A (2011) Towards a legibility metric: How to measure the perceived value of a robot. ICSR Work-In-Progress

  41. Lichtenthäler C, Lorenz T, Karg M, Kirsch A (2012a) Increasing perceived value between human and robots – measuring legibility in human aware navigation. In: Workshop on advanced robotics and its social impacts, pp 89–94

  42. Lichtenthäler C, Lorenz T, Kirsch A (2012b) Influence of legibility on perceived safety in a virtual human-robot path crossing task. In: International symposium on robot and human interactive communication, pp 676–681

  43. McGill R, Tukey JW, Larsen WA (1978) Variations of box plots. Am Stat 32(1):12–16

    Google Scholar 

  44. Mirnig N, Strasser E, Weiss A, Tscheligi M (2012) Studies in public places as a means to positively influence people’s attitude towards robots. In: International conference on social robotics, pp 209–218

  45. Mombaur K, Truong A, Laumond JP (2009) From human to humanoid locomotion - an inverse optimal control approach. Auton Robot 28(3):369–383

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Nass C, Moon Y (2000) Machines and mindlessness: social responses to computers. Int J Soc Issues 56(1):81–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Ruijten P (2015) On the perceived human-likeness of virtual health agents: towards a generalized measurement of anthropomorphism. In: Intelligent virtual agents - workshop on virtual health agents, At Delft

  48. Pandey AK, Alami R (2009) Towards a sociable robot guide which respects and supports the human activity. In: International conference on automation science and engineering, pp 262–267

  49. Pandey AK, Ali M, Alami R (2013) Towards a task-aware proactive sociable robot based on multi-state perspective-taking. Int J Soc Robot 5(2):215–236

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. Papageorgiou M, Leibold M, Buss M (2012) Optimierung: Statische, dynamische, stochastische Verfahren für die Anwendung. Springer, Heidelberg

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  51. Reeves B, Nass C (1996) The media equation: how people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

    Google Scholar 

  52. Rios-Martinez J, Spalanzani A, Laugier C (2015) From proxemics theory to socially-aware navigation: a survey. Int J Soc Robot 7(2):137–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Satake S, Kanda T, Glas D, Imai M, Ishiguro H, Hagita N (2009) How to approach humans? - strategies for social robots to initiate interaction. In: International conference on human-robot interaction, pp 109–116

  54. Sisbot E, Alami R, Simeon T, Dautenhahn K, Walters M, Woods S, Koay KL, Nehaniv C (2005) Navigation in the presence of humans. In: International conference on humanoid robots, pp 181–188

  55. Sisbot E, Marin-Urias L, Broqure X, Sidobre D, Alami R (2010) Synthesizing robot motions adapted to human presence. Int J Soc Robot 2:329–343

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Sobel R, Lillith N (1975) Determinant of nonstationary personal space invasion. J Psychol 97:39–45

    Google Scholar 

  57. Sommer R (1969) Personal space. The behavioral basis of design. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs

    Google Scholar 

  58. Sutcliffe A, Pineau J, Grollman D (2014) Rephrasing the problem of robotic social navigation. In: International conference on intelligent robots and systems

  59. Takayama L, Dooley D, Ju W (2011) Expressing thought: improving robot readability with animation principles. In: International conference on human-robot interaction, pp 69–76

  60. Torta E, Cuijpers R, Juola J (2013) Design of a parametric model of personal space for robotic social navigation. Int J Soc Robot 5(3):357–365

    Article  Google Scholar 

  61. Walters M, Dautenhahn K, Koay K, Kaouri C, Boekhorst R, Nehaniv C, Werry I, Lee D (2005) Close encounters: spatial distances between people and a robot of mechanistic appearance. In: International conference on humanoid robots, pp 450–455

  62. Walters M, Koay K, Woods S, Syrdal D, Dautenhahn K (2007) Robot to human approaches: preliminary results on comfortable distances and preferences. In: AAAI symposium on multidisciplinary collaborative socially assistive robots

  63. Wolff M (1973) Notes on the behaviour of pedestrians. People in places: the sociology of the familiar. Praeger, New York, pp 35–48

    Google Scholar 

  64. Wolfinger N (1995) Passing moments: some social dynamics of pedestrian interaction. J Contemp Ethnogr 24(3):323–340

    Article  Google Scholar 

  65. Woods S, Walters M, Koay K, Dautenhahn K (2006) Methodological issues in HRI: A comparison of live and video-based methods in robot to human approach direction trials. In: International symposium on robot and human interactive communication, pp 51–58

  66. Wright SJ, Nocedal J (1999) Numerical optimization, vol 2. Springer, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  67. Zhao M, Shome R, Yochelson I, Bekris K, Kowler E (2014) An experimental study for identifying features of legible manipulator paths. In: International symposium on experimental robotics

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work is supported in part within the ERC Advanced Grant SHRINE Agreement No. 267877 (http://www.shrine-project.eu) and in part by the Technische Universität München - Institute for Advanced Study (www.tum-ias.de), funded by the German Excellence Initiative. The authors gratefully thank Annemarie Turnwald for her support and all the participants for their valuable time.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Chair of Automatic Control Engineering, Technische Universität München (TUM), Theresienstrasse 90, 80333, Munich, Germany

    Daniel Carton, Dirk Wollherr & Martin Buss

  2. TUM Institute for Advanced Study, Technische Universität München, Lichtenbergstrasse 2a, 85748, Garching, Germany

    Martin Buss

  3. Department of Statistics, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München (LMU), Ludwigstrasse 33, 80539, Munich, Germany

    Wiktor Olszowy

Authors
  1. Daniel Carton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Wiktor Olszowy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dirk Wollherr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Martin Buss
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Daniel Carton.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Carton, D., Olszowy, W., Wollherr, D. et al. Socio-Contextual Constraints for Human Approach with a Mobile Robot. Int J of Soc Robotics 9, 309–327 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0394-3

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0394-3

Keywords

Search

Navigation