The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Theory and evaluation of human robot interactions
Abstract
Human-robot interaction (HRI) for mobile robots is still in its infancy. Most user interactions with robots have been limited to tele-operation capabilities where the most common interface provided to the user has been the video feed from the robotic platform and some way of directing the path of the robot. For mobile robots with semiautonomous capabilities, the user is also provided with a means of setting way points. More importantly, most HRI capabilities have been developed by robotics experts for use by robotics experts. As robots increase in capabilities and are able to perform more tasks in an autonomous manner we need to think about the interactions that humans will have with robots and what software architecture and user interface designs can accommodate the human in-the-loop. We also need to design systems that can be used by domain experts but not robotics experts. This paper outlines a theory of human-robot interaction and proposes the interactions and information needed by both humans and robots for the different levels of interaction, including an evaluation methodology based on situational awareness.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Socially intelligent robots: Dimensions of human-robot interaction
Dautenhahn, K. (2007) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2006.2004 · Cited by 1,210
Human – robot interaction review and challenges on task planning and programming
Tsarouchi, P., Makris, S., & Chryssolouris, G. (2016) · International Journal of Computer Integrated Manufacturing · doi:10.1080/0951192x.2015.1130251 · Cited by 376
Abbass, H. A. (2019) · Cognitive Computation · doi:10.1007/s12559-018-9619-0 · Cited by 200
"Where am i?" acquiring situation awareness using a remote robot platform
Yanco, H. A., & Drury, J. (2005) · 2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37583) · doi:10.1109/icsmc.2004.1400762 · Cited by 163
When computers take the lead: The automation of leadership
Wesche, J. S., & Sonderegger, A. (2019) · Computers in Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/j.chb.2019.07.027 · Cited by 157
Analysis and design of human-robot swarm interaction in firefighting
Naghsh, A. M., Gancet, J., Tanoto, A., & Roast, C. (2008) · RO-MAN 2008 - The 17th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication · doi:10.1109/roman.2008.4600675 · Cited by 81
Explainable goal-driven agents and robots-a comprehensive review
Sado, F., Loo, C. K., Liew, W. S., Kerzel, M., & Wermter, S. (2023) · ACM Computing Surveys · doi:10.1145/3564240 · Cited by 79
“Humans, on the other hand, play the role of supervisor, operator, mechanic, bystander, or teammate [184].”
BackgroundHuman-Robot Interaction: Evaluation Methods and Their Standardization
(2020) · Springer Series on Bio- and Neurosystems · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-42307-0 · Cited by 42
Nonverbal signaling for non-humanoid robots during human-robot collaboration
Cha, E., Mataric, M., & Fong, T. (2016) · 2016 11th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) · doi:10.1109/hri.2016.7451876 · Cited by 29
Metadata
- Authors
- Scholtz, J.
- Venue
- 36th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 2003. Proceedings of the
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2003
- Pages
- 10 pp.
- ISSN
- 1530-1605 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2143580450
- Cited by
- 433
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 19.68
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
