research-article

Open access

Robot Classification of Human Interruptibility and a Study of Its Effects

Authors:

Siddhartha Banerjee,

Sonia ChernovaAuthors Info & Claims

ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction (THRI), Volume 7, Issue 2

Article No.: 14, Pages 1 - 35

https://doi.org/10.1145/3277902

Published: 24 October 2018 Publication History

Abstract

As robots become increasingly prevalent in human environments, there will inevitably be times when the robot needs to interrupt a human to initiate an interaction. Our work introduces the first interruptibility-aware mobile-robot system, which uses social and contextual cues online to accurately determine when to interrupt a person. We evaluate multiple non-temporal and temporal models on the interruptibility classification task, and show that a variant of Conditional Random Fields (CRFs), the Latent-Dynamic CRF, is the most robust, accurate, and appropriate model for use on our system. Additionally, we evaluate different classification features and show that the observed demeanor of a person can help in interruptibility classification; but in the presence of detection noise, robust detection of object labels as a visual cue to the interruption context can improve interruptibility estimates. Finally, we deploy our system in a large-scale user study to understand the effects of interruptibility-awareness on human-task performance, robot-task performance, and on human interpretation of the robot’s social aptitude. Our results show that while participants are able to maintain task performance, even in the presence of interruptions, interruptibility-awareness improves the robot’s task performance and improves participant social perceptions of the robot.

References

[1]

Piotr D. Adamczyk and Brian P. Bailey. 2004. If not now, when? In Proceedings of the 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’04). ACM Press, New York, New York, 271--278.

Digital Library

[2]

Erik M. Altmann and J. Gregory Trafton. 2002. Memory for goals: An activation-based model. Cognitive Science 26, 1 (Jan. 2002), 39--83.

[3]

Siddhartha Banerjee and Sonia Chernova. 2017. Temporal models for robot classification of human interruptibility. In Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents 8 Multiagent Systems. IFAAMAS, 1350--1359. http://www.aamas2017.org/proceedings/pdfs/p1350.pdf.

Digital Library

[4]

Siddhartha Banerjee, Andrew Silva, Karen Feigh, and Sonia Chernova. 2018. Effects of interruptibility-aware robot behavior. arXiv Preprint arXiv:1804.06383 (2018).

[5]

Yoav Benjamini and Yosef Hochberg. 1995. Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Methodological) (1995), 289--300.

[6]

Christopher M. Bishop. 2006. Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning. Springer-Verlag New York.

Digital Library

[7]

Dan Bohus and Eric Horvitz. 2009. Dialog in the open world. In Proceedings of the 2009 International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI-MLMI’09). ACM Press, New York, New York, 31.

Digital Library

[8]

Leo Breiman. 2001. Random forests. Machine Learning 45, 1 (2001), 5--32.

Digital Library

[9]

Dražen Brščić, Tetsushi Ikeda, and Takayuki Kanda. 2017. Do you need help? A robot providing information to people who behave atypically. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 33, 2 (2017), 500--506.

Digital Library

[10]

Zhe Cao, Tomas Simon, Shih-En Wei, and Yaser Sheikh. 2016. Realtime multi-person 2D pose estimation using part affinity fields. arXiv Preprint arXiv:1611.08050 (2016).

[11]

Stuart K. Card, Thomas P. Moran, and Allen Newell. 1980. Computer text-editing: An information-processing analysis of a routine cognitive skill. Cognitive Psychology 12, 1 (Jan. 1980), 32--74.

[12]

Pierluigi Casale, Oriol Pujol, and Petia Radeva. 2011. Human activity recognition from accelerometer data using a wearable device. In Iberian Conference on Pattern Recognition and Image Analysis. Springer, 289--296.

[13]

Yi-Shiu Chiang, Ting-Sheng Chu, Chung Dial Lim, Tung-Yen Wu, Shih-Huan Tseng, and Li-Chen Fu. 2014. Personalizing robot behavior for interruption in social human-robot interaction. In 2014 IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Robotics and its Social Impacts. IEEE, 44--49.

[14]

Vivian Chu, Kalesha Bullard, and Andrea L. Thomaz. 2014. Multimodal real-time contingency detection for HRI. In 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE, 3327--3332.

[15]

Meng-Che Chuang, Raja Bala, Edgar A Bernal, Peter Paul, Aaron Burry, et al. 2014. Estimating gaze direction of vehicle drivers using a smartphone camera. In CVPR Workshops. 165--170.

Digital Library

[16]

Corinna Cortes and Vladimir Vapnik. 1995. Support-vector networks. Machine Learning 20, 3 (01 Sept. 1995), 273--297.

Digital Library

[17]

Christian Dondrup, Nicola Bellotto, Ferdian Jovan, and Marc Hanheide. 2015. Real-time multisensor people tracking for human-robot spatial interaction. In Workshop on Machine Learning for Social Robotics at International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). ICRA/IEEE.

[18]

Daniel A. Epstein, Daniel Avrahami, and Jacob T. Biehl. 2016. Taking 5: Work-breaks, productivity, and opportunities for personal informatics for knowledge workers. In CHI’16. ACM Press, San Jose, CA.

Digital Library

[19]

Kerstin Fischer, Bianca Soto, Caroline Pantofaru, and Leila Takayama. 2014. Initiating interactions in order to get help: Effects of social framing on people’s responses to robots’ requests for assistance. In 2014 RO-MAN: The 23rd IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication. IEEE, 999--1005.

[20]

James Fogarty, Scott E. Hudson, Christopher G. Atkeson, Daniel Avrahami, Jodi Forlizzi, Sara Kiesler, Johnny C. Lee, and Jie Yang. 2005. Predicting human interruptibility with sensors. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction 12, 1 (Mar. 2005), 119--146.

Digital Library

[21]

Mary Ellen Foster, Andre Gaschler, and Manuel Giuliani. 2017. Automatically classifying user engagement for dynamic multi-party human-robot interaction. International Journal of Social Robotics (July 2017).

[22]

A. Garrell, M. Villamizar, F. Moreno-Noguer, and A. Sanfeliu. 2017. Teaching robot’s proactive behavior using human assistance. International Journal of Social Robotics 9, 2 (Apr. 2017), 231--249.

[23]

T. Grundgeiger, D. Liu, P. M. Sanderson, S. Jenkins, and T. Leane. 2008. Effects of interruptions on prospective memory performance in anesthesiology. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting 52, 12 (Sept. 2008), 808--812.

[24]

Tobias Grundgeiger and Penelope Sanderson. 2009. Interruptions in healthcare: Theoretical views. International Journal of Medical Informatics 78, 5 (May 2009), 293--307.

[25]

Edward Twichell Hall. 1969. The Hidden Dimension. Anchor Books.

[26]

Sandra G. Hart and Lowell E. Staveland. 1988. Development of NASA-TLX (task load index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. 139--183.

[27]

Zhenyu He and Lianwen Jin. 2009. Activity recognition from acceleration data based on discrete consine transform and SVM. In IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. SMC 2009. IEEE, 5041--5044.

[28]

Geoffrey E. Hinton. 1990. Connectionist learning procedures. In Machine Learning, Volume III. Elsevier, 555--610.

Digital Library

[29]

Eric Horvitz and Johnson Apacible. 2003. Learning and reasoning about interruption. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI’03). ACM Press, New York, New York, 20.

Digital Library

[30]

Shamsi T. Iqbal and Brian P. Bailey. 2006. Leveraging characteristics of task structure to predict the cost of interruption. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’06). ACM Press, New York, New York, 741.

Digital Library

[31]

Yusuke Kato, Takayuki Kanda, and Hiroshi Ishiguro. 2015. May I help you? In Proceedings of the 10th Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI’15). ACM Press, New York, New York, 35--42.

Digital Library

[32]

Diederik P Kingma and Jimmy Ba. 2014. Adam: A method for stochastic optimization. arXiv Preprint arXiv:1412.6980 (2014).

[33]

Ari Kolbeinsson, Peter Thorvald, and Jessica Lindblom. 2017. Coordinating the interruption of assembly workers in manufacturing. Applied Ergonomics 58 (Jan. 2017), 361--371.

[34]

John Lafferty, Andrew McCallum, and Fernando Pereira. 2001. Conditional random fields: Probabilistic models for segmenting and labeling sequence data. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Machine Learning, ICML, Vol. 1. 282--289.

Digital Library

[35]

Byung Cheol Lee and Vincent G. Duffy. 2015. The effects of task interruption on human performance: A study of the systematic classification of human behavior and interruption frequency. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing 8 Service Industries 25, 2 (Mar. 2015), 137--152.

Digital Library

[36]

Tsung-Yi Lin, Michael Maire, Serge Belongie, James Hays, Pietro Perona, Deva Ramanan, Piotr Dollár, and C. Lawrence Zitnick. 2014. Microsoft coco: Common objects in context. In European Conference on Computer Vision. Springer, 740--755.

[37]

Gloria Mark, Daniela Gudith, and Ulrich Klocke. 2008. The cost of interrupted work. In Proceeding of the 26th Annual CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (CHI’08). ACM Press, New York, New York, 107.

Digital Library

[38]

Mark A. McDaniel and Gilles O. Einstein. 2000. Strategic and automatic processes in prospective memory retrieval: A multiprocess framework. Applied Cognitive Psychology 14, 7 (2000), S127--S144.

[39]

Daniel McFarlane and Kara Latorella. 2002. The scope and importance of human interruption in human-computer interaction design. Human-Computer Interaction 17, 1 (Mar. 2002), 1--61.

Digital Library

[40]

Daniel Craig McFarlane. 2002. Comparison of four primary methods for coordinating the interruption of people in human-computer interaction. Human-Computer Interaction 17, 1 (Mar. 2002), 63--139.

Digital Library

[41]

Yoshiro Miyata and Donald A. Norman. 1986. Psychological issues in support of multiple activities. User Centered System Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction (1986), 265--284.

[42]

C. Mollaret, A. A. Mekonnen, F. Lerasle, I. Ferrané, J. Pinquier, B. Boudet, and P. Rumeau. 2016. A multi-modal perception based assistive robotic system for the elderly. Computer Vision and Image Understanding (Mar. 2016).

Digital Library

[43]

Christopher A. Monk, Deborah A. Boehm-Davis, George Mason, and J. Gregory Trafton. 2004. Recovering from interruptions: Implications for driver distraction research. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46, 4 (Dec. 2004), 650--663.

[44]

Louis-Philippe Morency, Ariadna Quattoni, and Trevor Darrell. 2007. Latent-dynamic discriminative models for continuous gesture recognition. In 2007 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. IEEE, 1--8.

[45]

Bilge Mutlu and Jodi Forlizzi. 2008. Robots in organizations. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (HRI’08). ACM Press, New York, New York, 287.

Digital Library

[46]

Vinod Nair and Geoffrey E. Hinton. 2010. Rectified linear units improve restricted Boltzmann machines. In Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML-10). 807--814.

Digital Library

[47]

Aastha Nigam and Laurel D. Riek. 2015. Social context perception for mobile robots. In 2015 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 3621--3627.

[48]

Aude Oliva and Antonio Torralba. 2001. Modeling the shape of the scene: A holistic representation of the spatial envelope. International Journal of Computer Vision 42, 3 (2001), 145--175.

Digital Library

[49]

F. Pedregosa, G. Varoquaux, A. Gramfort, V. Michel, B. Thirion, O. Grisel, M. Blondel, P. Prettenhofer, R. Weiss, V. Dubourg, J. Vanderplas, A. Passos, D. Cournapeau, M. Brucher, M. Perrot, and E. Duchesnay. 2011. Scikit-learn: Machine learning in python. Journal of Machine Learning Research 12 (Oct. 2011), 2825--2830.

Digital Library

[50]

L. R. Rabiner. 1989. A tutorial on Hidden Markov models and selected applications in speech recognition. Proc. IEEE 77, 2 (1989), 257--286.

[51]

Joseph Redmon and Ali Farhadi. 2016. YOLO9000: Better, faster, stronger. arXiv Preprint arXiv:1612.08242 (2016).

[52]

Shaoqing Ren, Kaiming He, Ross Girshick, and Jian Sun. 2015. Faster R-CNN: Towards real-time object detection with region proposal networks. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems. 91--99.

Digital Library

[53]

A. Joy Rivera. 2014. A socio-technical systems approach to studying interruptions: Understanding the interrupter’s perspective. Applied Ergonomics 45, 3 (May 2014), 747--756.

[54]

Stephanie Rosenthal, Manuela M. Veloso, and Anind K. Dey. 2012. Is someone in this office available to help me?Journal of Intelligent 8 Robotic Systems 66, 1--2 (Apr. 2012), 205--221.

Digital Library

[55]

Penelope M. Sanderson and Tobias Grundgeiger. 2015. How do interruptions affect clinician performance in healthcare? Negotiating fidelity, control, and potential generalizability in the search for answers. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies 79 (July 2015), 85--96.

Digital Library

[56]

Nadine B. Sarter. 2013. Multimodal support for interruption management: Models, empirical findings, and design recommendations. Proc. IEEE 101, 9 (Sept. 2013), 2105--2112.

[57]

Satoru Satake, Takayuki Kanda, Dylan F. Glas, Michita Imai, Hiroshi Ishiguro, and Norihiro Hagita. 2009. How to approach humans? In Proceedings of the 4th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human Robot Interaction (HRI’09). ACM Press, New York, New York, 109.

Digital Library

[58]

Paul Saulnier, Ehud Sharlin, and Saul Greenberg. 2011. Exploring minimal nonverbal interruption in HRI. In 2011 RO-MAN. IEEE, 79--86.

[59]

Chao Shi, Masahiro Shiomi, Takayuki Kanda, Hiroshi Ishiguro, and Norihiro Hagita. 2015. Measuring communication participation to initiate conversation in human robot interaction. International Journal of Social Robotics 7, 5 (Nov. 2015), 889--910.

[60]

Elaine Schaertl Short, Mai Lee Chang, and Andrea Thomaz. 2018. Detecting contingency for HRI in open-world environments. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI’18). ACM Press, New York, New York, 425--433.

Digital Library

[61]

Cheri Speier, Joseph S. Valacich, and Iris Vessey. 1997. The effects of task interruption and information presentation on individual decision making. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Information Systems. Association for Information Systems, 21--36. http://dl.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=353080

Digital Library

[62]

Hermann Stern, Viktoria Pammer, and Stefanie N. Lindstaedt. 2011. A preliminary study on interruptibility detection based on location and calendar information. Proc. CoSDEO 11 (2011).

[63]

Sy Bor Wang, A. Quattoni, L.-P. Morency, D. Demirdjian, and T. Darrell. 2006. Hidden conditional random fields for gesture recognition. In 2006 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition - Volume 2 (CVPR’06), Vol. 2. IEEE, 1521--1527.

Digital Library

[64]

Edward R. Sykes. 2014. A cloud-based interaction management system architecture for mobile devices. Procedia Computer Science 34 (2014), 625--632.

[65]

Greg Trafton, Laura Hiatt, Anthony Harrison, Frank Tanborello, Sangeet Khemlani, and Alan Schultz. 2013. ACT-R/E: An embodied cognitive architecture for human-robot interaction. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction 2, 1 (Mar. 2013), 30--55.

Digital Library

[66]

J. Gregory Trafton, Allison Jacobs, and Anthony M. Harrison. 2012. Building and verifying a predictive model of interruption resumption. Proc. IEEE 100, 3 (Mar. 2012), 648--659.

[67]

Liam D. Turner, Stuart M. Allen, and Roger M. Whitaker. 2015. Interruptibility prediction for ubiquitous systems. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (UbiComp’15). ACM Press, New York, New York, 801--812.

Digital Library

[68]

Douglas L. Vail, Manuela M. Veloso, and John D. Lafferty. 2007. Conditional random fields for activity recognition. In Proceedings of the 6th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS’07). ACM Press, New York, New York, 1.

Digital Library

[69]

Kaipeng Zhang, Zhanpeng Zhang, Zhifeng Li, and Yu Qiao. 2016. Joint face detection and alignment using multitask cascaded convolutional networks. IEEE Signal Processing Letters 23, 10 (2016), 1499--1503.

[70]

Min-Ling Zhang and Zhi-Hua Zhou. 2007. ML-KNN: A lazy learning approach to multi-label learning. Pattern Recognition 40, 7 (2007), 2038--2048.

Digital Library

Cited By

Duncan JAlambeigi FPryor M(2024)A Survey of Multimodal Perception Methods for Human–Robot Interaction in Social EnvironmentsACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/365703013:4(1-50)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3657030
Dennler NRuan CHadiwijoyo JChen BNikolaidis SMatarić M(2023)Design Metaphors for Understanding User Expectations of Socially Interactive Robot EmbodimentsACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/355048912:2(1-41)Online publication date: 14-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3550489
Chuy OSapra HTan XRavichandar HChernova S(2023)Benefits of Multi-Objective Trajectory Adaptation in Close-Proximity Human-Robot Interaction2023 32nd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309445(2156-2161)Online publication date: 28-Aug-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309445
Show More Cited By

Index Terms

Robot Classification of Human Interruptibility and a Study of Its Effects
1. Computer systems organization
  1. Embedded and cyber-physical systems
    1. Robotics
      1. Robotic autonomy

Recommendations

Temporal Models for Robot Classification of Human Interruptibility
AAMAS '17: Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Autonomous Agents and MultiAgent Systems

Robots are increasingly being deployed in unstructured human environments where they will need to approach and interrupt collocated humans. Most prior work on robot interruptions has focused on how to interrupt a person or on estimating a human's ...
Interpersonal interruptibility: a framework and research program
CHI EA '08: CHI '08 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems

To date, research exploring interpersonal technology-mediated interruptions has focused on understanding how knowledge of an "interruptee's-local-context" can be utilized to reduce unwanted intrusions. However, the value of everyday interruptions are ...
Biases in human estimation of interruptibility: effects and implications for practice
CHI '07: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems

People have developed a variety of conventions for negotiating face to face interruptions. The physical distribution of teams, however, together with the use of computer mediated communication and awareness systems, fundamentally alters what information ...

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction

ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction Volume 7, Issue 2

Special Issue on Artificial Intelligence and Human-Robot Interaction

July 2018

109 pages

EISSN:2573-9522

DOI:10.1145/3284682

Editors:
Odest Chadwicke Jenkins
University of Michigan, USA
,
Selma Sabanovic
Indiana University, USA

Issue’s Table of Contents

Copyright © 2018 ACM.

Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 24 October 2018

Accepted: 01 August 2018

Received: 01 April 2018

Published in THRI Volume 7, Issue 2

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Request Permissions

Check for updates

Author Tags

Qualifiers

Research-article
Research
Refereed

Funding Sources

Early Career Faculty
NASA's Space Technology Research Grants Program

Contributors

Other Metrics

View Article Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

9
Total Citations
View Citations
947
Total Downloads

Downloads (Last 12 months)240
Downloads (Last 6 weeks)37

Reflects downloads up to 28 Dec 2024

Other Metrics

View Author Metrics

Citations

Cited By

Duncan JAlambeigi FPryor M(2024)A Survey of Multimodal Perception Methods for Human–Robot Interaction in Social EnvironmentsACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/365703013:4(1-50)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2024
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3657030
Dennler NRuan CHadiwijoyo JChen BNikolaidis SMatarić M(2023)Design Metaphors for Understanding User Expectations of Socially Interactive Robot EmbodimentsACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction10.1145/355048912:2(1-41)Online publication date: 14-Apr-2023
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3550489
Chuy OSapra HTan XRavichandar HChernova S(2023)Benefits of Multi-Objective Trajectory Adaptation in Close-Proximity Human-Robot Interaction2023 32nd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309445(2156-2161)Online publication date: 28-Aug-2023
https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309445
Natarajan MSeraj EAltundas BPaleja RYe SChen LJensen RChang KGombolay M(2023)Human-Robot Teaming: Grand ChallengesCurrent Robotics Reports10.1007/s43154-023-00103-14:3(81-100)Online publication date: 8-Aug-2023
https://doi.org/10.1007/s43154-023-00103-1
Cila N(2022)Designing Human-Agent Collaborations: Commitment, responsiveness, and supportProceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems10.1145/3491102.3517500(1-18)Online publication date: 29-Apr-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/3491102.3517500
Taylor AKaufman RHuang MAdmoni H(2022)Group Activity Recognition in Restaurants to Address Underlying Needs: A Case Study2022 31st IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)10.1109/RO-MAN53752.2022.9900691(236-243)Online publication date: 29-Aug-2022
https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1109/RO-MAN53752.2022.9900691
Lyons JSycara KLewis MCapiola A(2021)Human–Autonomy Teaming: Definitions, Debates, and DirectionsFrontiers in Psychology10.3389/fpsyg.2021.58958512Online publication date: 28-May-2021
https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.589585
Avelino JGarcia-Marques LVentura RBernardino A(2021)Break the Ice: a Survey on Socially Aware Engagement for Human–Robot First EncountersInternational Journal of Social Robotics10.1007/s12369-020-00720-213:8(1851-1877)Online publication date: 8-Jan-2021
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00720-2
Rossi ADautenhahn KLee Koay KWalters M(2020)How Social Robots Influence People’s Trust in Critical Situations2020 29th IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)10.1109/RO-MAN47096.2020.9223471(1020-1025)Online publication date: Aug-2020
https://doi.org/10.1109/RO-MAN47096.2020.9223471
Rossi SRossi ADautenhahn K(2020)The Secret Life of Robots: Perspectives and Challenges for Robot’s Behaviours During Non-interactive TasksInternational Journal of Social Robotics10.1007/s12369-020-00650-z12:6(1265-1278)Online publication date: 23-Apr-2020
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-020-00650-z

View Options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

eReader

View online with eReader.

Login options

Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

Full Access

Get this Article

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

View Issue’s Table of Contents