Proxemics & Social Navigation

Proxemics & Social Navigation

Proxemics & Social Navigation <Reid Simmons> Illah Nourbakhsh HRI: Proxemics1 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 Team ordering for first presentation • Day 1 (3 February, Wednesday) • Day 2 (8 February, Monday) HRI: Proxemics2 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 1 Proxemics • “Interrelated observations and theories of [hu]man’s use of space as a specialized elaboration of culture” [Hall, 1966] HRI: Proxemics3 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 Personal Spaces for Social Interaction acquaintances, lectures, strangers theater lovers, family, friends, children, small groups close friends HRI: Proxemics4 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 2 Personal Space • Feel uncomfortable if others within personal space – “egg-shaped,” with more space in front – Exact size is culturally determined HRI: Proxemics5 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 Measurement of Personal Space • Break into your teams • Create an NxN matrix of names • One person approaches second person face on, until first person begins to feel uncomfortable • Third person measures from nose to nose • Fourth person records distance (in inches) • Switch off until every person has approached every other person • Analyze for (a) consistency of each person (b) consistency across group • What factors can explain any differences? HRI: Proxemics6 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 3 Factors Affecting Personal Space • Interpersonal Relationships • Gender • Culture Lewis Model of Cultural Types – Cool and decisive (US, Germany) – Accommodating and non- confrontational (China, Japan) – Warm and impulsive (Italy, Mexico) HRI: Proxemics7 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 Proxemics and Robots • One method people have for dealing with violated personal space is dehumanization – treating the intruder as inanimate – Are robots seen as deserving of personal space, or are they treated as inanimate? HRI: Proxemics8 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 4 Empirical Evaluation of HR Proxemics • Based on several studies with many participants and different robots (Walters, Dautenhan, et al) Approach Context Mean (cm) Lower Bound (95% CI) Upper Bound (95% CI) Interaction: Pass 60 57.6 62.7 Verbal 60 58.0 63.1 Physical 49 46.3 51.4 Appearance: Mechanoid 51 48.7 53.0 Humanoid 62 60.1 64.2 Initiative: Robot 57 53.4 61.1 Human 56 52.0 60.6 Direction: Front 58 54.1 62.5 Side 55 51.4 59.0 Preferences: Mechanoid 60 46.8 54.2 Humanoid 56 61.6 69.2 Compares to: Short 61 53.6 61.4 51 cm for human Tall 55 54.8 62.1 56 cm for “dummy” Overall 57 53.0 60.5 HRI: Proxemics9 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 Social Navigation • Culturally determined conventions that guide our movement through (peopled) space • Why do we use social conventions? HRI: Proxemics10 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 5 Riding Elevators “Wait until everyone gets off before getting on” ! ? ? X • Need to model people’s intentions – Only partially observable (ambiguous) HRI: Proxemics11 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 Passing in Corridors Goal HRI: Proxemics12 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 6 Passing in Corridors person goal robot • Treat Problem as Constrained Optimization – Include task constraints (e.g. minimize distance, time) and social constraints (e.g. avoid personal space, pass on right) – Replan continually to deal with uncertainty HRI: Proxemics13 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 Passing in Corridors – “Social” robot seen as significantly more respectful of human’s personal space and robot did better in getting out of person’s way – Despite that, “social” robot not seen as significantly more human-like or social • due to both lack of social cues and confusing cues! HRI: Proxemics14 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 7 Waiting in Line • Standing in Line – How to detect end of the line? – How much space to leave in front? – When to move forward? HRI: Proxemics15 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 An Impatient Robot… HRI: Proxemics16 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 8 Approaching People HRI: Proxemics17 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 User Study of Social Approaching • User Attitudes – Social robot seen as more intelligent and social in both back-facing and side-facing conditions – Social robot seen as more attentive to personal space and social conventions in back-facing condition – Women found social robot more attentive to personal space and social conventions, under all conditions HRI: Proxemics18 Simmons, Nourbakhsh : Spring 2016 9.

View Full Text

Details

  • File Type
    pdf
  • Upload Time
    -
  • Content Languages
    English
  • Upload User
    Anonymous/Not logged-in
  • File Pages
    9 Page
  • File Size
    -

Download

Channel Download Status
Express Download Enable

Copyright

We respect the copyrights and intellectual property rights of all users. All uploaded documents are either original works of the uploader or authorized works of the rightful owners.

  • Not to be reproduced or distributed without explicit permission.
  • Not used for commercial purposes outside of approved use cases.
  • Not used to infringe on the rights of the original creators.
  • If you believe any content infringes your copyright, please contact us immediately.

Support

For help with questions, suggestions, or problems, please contact us