slide1 n.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Course SHS Program in Cognitive Psychology Spring 2007 Human-Robot Interaction User-centred design of social robots Aud PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Course SHS Program in Cognitive Psychology Spring 2007 Human-Robot Interaction User-centred design of social robots Aud

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 46

Course SHS Program in Cognitive Psychology Spring 2007 Human-Robot Interaction User-centred design of social robots Aud - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 105 Views
  • Uploaded on

Course SHS Program in Cognitive Psychology Spring 2007 Human-Robot Interaction User-centred design of social robots Aude G Billard Learning Algorithms and Systems Laboratory - LASA EPFL, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology Lausanne, Switzerland aude.billard@epfl.ch.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Course SHS Program in Cognitive Psychology Spring 2007 Human-Robot Interaction User-centred design of social robots Aud' - dasan


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
slide1

Course SHS

Program in Cognitive Psychology

Spring 2007

Human-Robot Interaction

User-centred design of social robots

Aude G Billard

Learning Algorithms and Systems Laboratory - LASA

EPFL, Swiss Federal Institute of Technology

Lausanne, Switzerland

aude.billard@epfl.ch

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide2

The Aesthetic of the Body

Why is Aesthetic important?

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide3

The Aesthetic of the Body

It is a truism that people will be more inclined to interact with “attractive” faces than with “unattractive” ones.

Typical appealing features are large eyes, symmetric and round faces, pink cheeks and big eyelashes.

Dolls’ faces versus Monster’s faces?

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

C. DiSalvo, F. Gemperle, J. Forlizzi, and S. Kiesler. All robots are not created equal: The design and perception of humanoid robot heads. In Proc. Designing Interactive Systems, pages 321: 326, 2002.

slide4

The Aesthetic of the Body

  • 19th-20th Century: Automata
  • (Automated toys)
    • Mimicking the body and behavior of an animals
    • Only one single behavior
    • Completely preprogrammed in the mechanics
    • The aesthetic was very important – pieces of art

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide5

Mini-Humanoids

PINO

Kitano ERATO Project, Tokyo

Sound and Vision

HOAP-1

Fujitsu Laboratory Ltd.

48 cm, 6 kg, 20 DOF,

OS: RT-Linux

USB 1.0 (12Mbps)

SDR-3X, Sony Dream Robot

50cm, 5 Kg, 24 DOFs

OS: Aperios, OPEN-R,

16MB memory stick

CCD Color Camera, Microphone (x2),

IR distance, Acceleration,

Touch Detection (x8), SpeakerWalking Speed, 15m per minute

slide6

Baby Robots

My Real Baby (2000)

IRobot Corp, Boston, USA

Robota (1997-2002)

Univ. of Edinburgh 1997-1998,

EPFL (Switzerland) 1998-1999

DIDEL SA (Switzerland) 1999-2007

CSI, Paris, France 2000-2002

USC, Los Angeles,2001-2002

slide7

The Aesthetic of the Body

"uncanny valley"[Mori 1970]

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

the aesthetic of the face
The Aesthetic of the Face

Maverick, 2001

RIKEN & USC

Berthoc, 2006

Univ. Bielefeld

Surprisingly, however, many of the humanoid robots developed so far have more in common with monsters than with dolls.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

the aesthetic of the face1
The Aesthetic of the Face

University of Pisa & Jet Propulsion Lab

Kobayashi / Ishiguro’s Lab

Science University of Tokyo, 2001

Another set of attempts

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

human like body
BiPed Locomotion Human-like body
  • Binocular Vision
  • Anthropomorphic Head

Kawato Erato Project,

ATR, Kyoto, Japan

YFX Studios,

Japan, USA

  • Anthropomorphic Hands
  • Anthropomorphic Arms

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

University of Karslruhe, Germany

BIP 2000, CRNS, France

the aesthetic of the body
The Aesthetic of the Body

Repliee R1: Ishiguro’s lab, Osaka Univ.

This android has 9 degree of freedom in her head.

She can move her eyes, eyelids, mouth, and neck.

Its body is covered with silicone, so the skin feels humanlike.And it has 4 high sensitivity skin sensors under the skin.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

the aesthetic of the body1
The Aesthetic of the Body

Repliee R2: Ishiguro’s lab, Osaka Univ.

Facial expressions of the adult android: 13 of the 42 actuators are used in the head. Humanlike facial expressions are realized by the motion of the eyes and mouth.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

the aesthetic of the body2
The Aesthetic of the Body

Together with the company Kokoro, Ishiguro’s lab at Osaka Univ has developed a new life-like android called Actroid DER2.  This android looks very human and talks and moves its head, arms, hands, and body.  This android is available for rental now at the rate of $3,500 for 5 days.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

the aesthetic of the face2
The Aesthetic of the Face

Geminoid , Ishiguro’s Lab, Osaka University

Hiroshi Ishiguro would say that his Geminoid is like a twin!

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

And, finally, he cloned himself!

slide15

The Aesthetic of the Face

The realism of the facial expressions are as important as the overall aesthetic of the face

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

expressing emotions

Designing Robot’s Faces

Expressing Emotions

Sad Happy Surprised

The Kismet Robot, C. Breazael, MIT, 1999

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

expressing emotions1

Designing Robot’s Faces

Expressing Emotions

From left to right and top

to bottom: neutral, anger, sadness, fear, happiness, and surprise.

Feelix robot by L. Canamero, MIT, 1999

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

L. Canamero, J Fredslund, I show you how I like you-can you read it in my face, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A,, 2001

slide18

Designing Robot’s Faces

  • Kaspar has 8DOF head and two 6DOF arms.
  • Rational behind the development of Kaspar is:
  • consistency of appearance and complexity between the head, body and hands to aid natural interaction
  • minimal expressive features to create the impression of sociability

Mike Blow, Kerstin Dautenhahn, Andrew Appleby, Chrystopher L. Nehaniv, David Lee, The Art of Designing Robot Faces - Dimensions for Human-Robot Interaction, Proc. AMC/IEEE HRI06, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, 2006, pp. 331 - 332.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

the aesthetic of the face3
The Aesthetic of the Face

Mike Blow, Kerstin Dautenhahn, Andrew Appleby, Chrystopher L. Nehaniv, David Lee, The Art of Designing Robot Faces - Dimensions for Human-Robot Interaction, Proc. AMC/IEEE HRI06, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, 2006, pp. 331 - 332.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide20

Designing Robot’s Faces

e.g. Picasso’s cubic faces

e.g. a Photograph

e.g. Comics faces

Mike Blow, Kerstin Dautenhahn, Andrew Appleby, Chrystopher L. Nehaniv, David Lee, The Art of Designing Robot Faces - Dimensions for Human-Robot Interaction, Proc. AMC/IEEE HRI06, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA, 2006, pp. 331 - 332.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide21

Expressive Body Movements

Keepon (Kozima’s group, CRL, Japan):

Very simple but powerful design to convey joint attention and turn taking behavior

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide22

Expressive Body Movements

Keepon's kinematic mechanism. Two gimbals are connected by four wires; the lower gimbal is driven by two motors.

Another motor rotates the whole inner-structure; yet another drives the skull downward for bobbing.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide23

Expressive Body Movements

Attentive action Directing the head up/down and left/right so as to orient Keepon's face/body to a certain target in the environment. Keepon seems to be perceiving the target. This action includes eye-contact and joint attention.

Emotive action Keeping its attention in a certain direction, Keepon rocks its body from side to side and/or bobs its body up and down. Keepon seems to express emotions (like pleasure and excitement) about the target.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide24

Designing Robot Toys

Robota: Educational and Therapeutic Toy

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide25

What is the use of Robota?

Robota, DIDEL SA

Price: $2’800.-

My Real Baby, IRobot Corp

Price: $100.-

SDR-3X, Sony

Price: Luxury car (>$100’000.-)

Robota fills a gap in the market: It is an affordable humanoid robot

Teaching toy: It provides a nice basis for child-robot interaction

Education: It has development software, you can have several robots in a class room

slide26

Designing Robot Toys

Design Issues behind Robota

  • Robota’s Body:
  • Cuteness
  • Human-likeness, i.e. respecting the body proportion of a young child (between 16 and 20 months old),
  • Naturalness of the motions, i.e. the robot’s motions should be human-like.
  • Robota’s Capabilities:

Provided with capabilities for interactions that a child of this age would display:

  • To recognize human faces and direct its gaze towards the user,
  • To understand and learn a restricted vocabulary
  • Simple imitation of the user’s motion

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide27

Designing Robot Toys

First Prototype

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

  • Univ of Edinburgh, 1998
slide28

Designing Robot Toys

First Prototype

Learning Dance Movements

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

  • Univ of Edinburgh, 1998
slide29

Designing Robot Toys

Second Prototype

LAMI - EPFL, 1999

In collaboration with Jean-Daniel Nicoud and Andre Guignard

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide30

Designing Robot Toys

Second Prototype

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

Billard, A. (2003) Robota: Clever Toy and Educational Tool. Robotics & Autonomous Systems, 42, 259-269.

slide31

Face and Motion Tracking

CMOS FlyCam camera

PDA - Pocket-PC

400MHz, 64Mb

Windows CE

Embedded C++

Speech Processing

CONVERSAY

synthesis + recognition

Kinesthetic – Haptic

Potentiometers

Touch

Switches

Designing Robot Toys

Robota – The Product

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide32

Designing Robot Toys

Robota – The Product

Since 1999, Robota is a commercial product sold by DIDEL SA, Switzerland

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide33

Designing Robot Toys

ROBOTA’S EYES

  • Three degrees of freedom:
  • 1 for horizontal binocular motion
  • 2 for vertical motion (separate blinking)
  • Aesthetic: all components within the head

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

Pongas, D., Guenter, F., Guignard, A. and Billard, A. (2004) Development of a Miniature Pair of Eyes With Camera for the Humanoid Robot Robota. IEEE-RAS/RSJ International Conference on Humanoid Robots.

slide34

Designing Robot Toys

ROBOTA’S EYES

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide35

Designing Robot Toys

Robota’s eyes

  • 2 USB Cameras
  • VGA (640X480)
  • 15 frames per second

IEEE Conf. In Humanoid Robotics, HUMANOIDS’04

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide36

Body and Brain must Match

  • It is fundamental that the robot’s cognitive capabilities match its physical appearance.
  • An “adult-like” humanoid robot will be expected to produce adult-like capabilities (understanding of speech and complex manipulation capabilities).
  • Conversely, if one interacts with a baby-like robot, one will probably have lower expectations on the robot’s speech and manipulation capabilities.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide37

Designing the body and the brain of a robot

  • Why are the key criteria?
    • The robot’s body creates expectations in terms of the robot’s capabilities.
    • If these do not match, the robot loses some of its believability and of its appeal.
  • What are the main challenges?
    • To manage to endow the robot with complex facial and body expressions, while not loosing the aesthetic of the robot.
    • To better understand the complex and subtle effects that each of these features have on human-robot interaction.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

the importance of having human like motions
The importance of having human-like motions

Ishiguro’s Android driven by sinusoid-like motions

Real-time mapping of human motion on the Android

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

the kindness of the behaviour
The Kindness of the Behaviour

Ri-Man robot from Riken

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide40

Human-like behavior

Robita, Waseda University

Infanoid, CSL, ATR, Kyoto

Goal: Creates gaze contact and change gaze directionality with focus of interest

Development: Oculo-motor control, eye-head coordination, visuo-audio control

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide41

Human-like behavior

Darrin Bentivegna, ATR, Kyoto

Infanoid, CSL, ATR, Kyoto

Goal: Teaching the robot through imitation

Development: From recognizing to categorizing, learning and reproducing gestures gestures

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide42

Human-like behavior

Subject standing against a wall

Subject seated on a chair

4 different scenarios were studied in the trials where a robot approached the subject who was located in the living room:

1) Seated on a chair in the middle of an open space.

2) Standing in the middle of an open space.

3) Seated at a table in the middle of an open space.

4) Standing with their back against a wall.

Sarah Naomi Woods, Michael Leonard Walters, Kheng Lee Koay, Kerstin Dautenhahn (2006) Methodological Issues in HRI: A Comparison of Live and Video-Based Methods in Robot to Human Approach Direction Trials. Proc. The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN06).

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide43

Human-like behavior

  • The main findings were:
  • Humans strongly did not like a direct frontal approach by a robot, especially while sitting (even at a table) or while standing with their back to a wall.
  • An approach from the front left or front right was preferred.
  • When standing in an open space a frontal approach was more
  • acceptable and although a rear approach was not usually most
  • preferred, it was generally acceptable to subjects if physically
  • more convenient.

Sarah Naomi Woods, Michael Leonard Walters, Kheng Lee Koay, Kerstin Dautenhahn (2006) Methodological Issues in HRI: A Comparison of Live and Video-Based Methods in Robot to Human Approach Direction Trials. Proc. The 15th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN06).

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide44

Human-like behavior

The child groups showed a dominant response to prefer the ‘social zone’ distance, comparable to distances people adopt when talking to other humans. From the single adult studies a small majority preferred the ‘personal zone’, reserved for talking to friends. However, significant minorities deviate from this pattern.

M. L. Walters, K. Dautenhahn, K. L. Koay, C. Kaouri, R. te Boekhorst, C. L. Nehaniv, I. Werry, D. Lee (2005) Close encounters: Spatial distances between people and a robot of mechanistic appearance. Proc. IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids2005), pp. 450-455.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide45

Summary

  • The robot’s face must be appealing to enhance the interaction
  • It must be able to express emotions to which humans can relate
  • Brain and body must match  the robot’s capabilities must match the expectations raised by its body features
  • Simple designs can sometimes be more effective than highly complex and realistic ones
  • The robot must be endowed with basic social behaviors:
  • Joint attention, imitation, keep a desired distance.

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007

slide46

CONTEST

Team of 3

Draw the most appealing robot

15 minutes

A.G. Billard, Autonomous Robots Class Spring 2007