Nudging or Waiting?: Automatically Synthesized Robot Strategies for Evacuating Noncompliant Users in an Emergency Situation

Yuhan Hu, Jin Ryu, David Gundana, Kirstin H. Petersen, H. Kress-Gazit, G. Hoffman
{"title":"Nudging or Waiting?: Automatically Synthesized Robot Strategies for Evacuating Noncompliant Users in an Emergency Situation","authors":"Yuhan Hu, Jin Ryu, David Gundana, Kirstin H. Petersen, H. Kress-Gazit, G. Hoffman","doi":"10.1145/3568162.3576955","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Robots have the potential to assist in emergency evacuation tasks, but it is not clear how robots should behave to evacuate people who are not fully compliant, perhaps due to panic or other priorities in an emergency. In this paper, we compare two robot strategies: an actively nudging robot that initiates evacuation and pulls toward the exit and a passively waiting robot that stays around users and waits for instruction. Both strategies were automatically synthesized from a description of the desired behavior. We conduct a within participant study ( = 20) in a simulated environment to compare the evacuation effectiveness between the two robot strategies. Our results indicate an advantage of the nudging robot for effective evacuation when being exposed to the evacuation scenario for the first time. The waiting robot results in lower efficiency, higher mental load, and more physical conflicts. However, participants like the waiting robots equally or slightly more when they repeat the evacuation scenario and are more familiar with the situation. Our qualitative analysis of the participants' feedback suggests several design implications for future emergency evacuation robots.","PeriodicalId":36515,"journal":{"name":"ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1145/3568162.3576955","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ROBOTICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Robots have the potential to assist in emergency evacuation tasks, but it is not clear how robots should behave to evacuate people who are not fully compliant, perhaps due to panic or other priorities in an emergency. In this paper, we compare two robot strategies: an actively nudging robot that initiates evacuation and pulls toward the exit and a passively waiting robot that stays around users and waits for instruction. Both strategies were automatically synthesized from a description of the desired behavior. We conduct a within participant study ( = 20) in a simulated environment to compare the evacuation effectiveness between the two robot strategies. Our results indicate an advantage of the nudging robot for effective evacuation when being exposed to the evacuation scenario for the first time. The waiting robot results in lower efficiency, higher mental load, and more physical conflicts. However, participants like the waiting robots equally or slightly more when they repeat the evacuation scenario and are more familiar with the situation. Our qualitative analysis of the participants' feedback suggests several design implications for future emergency evacuation robots.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
推动还是等待?:紧急情况下疏散不服从用户的自动合成机器人策略
机器人有潜力协助紧急疏散任务,但目前尚不清楚机器人应该如何疏散那些在紧急情况下可能由于恐慌或其他优先事项而不完全服从的人。在本文中,我们比较了两种机器人策略:主动推动机器人启动疏散并向出口拉,被动等待机器人留在用户周围并等待指令。这两种策略都是根据期望行为的描述自动合成的。我们在模拟环境中进行了参与者内部研究(= 20),以比较两种机器人策略之间的疏散效果。我们的研究结果表明,在第一次暴露于疏散场景时,轻推机器人具有有效疏散的优势。等待机器人导致效率降低,精神负荷增加,身体冲突增多。然而,当参与者重复疏散场景并对情况更熟悉时,他们对等待的机器人的喜爱程度相同或略高。我们对参与者反馈的定性分析为未来紧急疏散机器人的设计提供了一些启示。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction
ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction Computer Science-Artificial Intelligence
CiteScore
7.70
自引率
5.90%
发文量
65
期刊介绍: ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction (THRI) is a prestigious Gold Open Access journal that aspires to lead the field of human-robot interaction as a top-tier, peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary publication. The journal prioritizes articles that significantly contribute to the current state of the art, enhance overall knowledge, have a broad appeal, and are accessible to a diverse audience. Submissions are expected to meet a high scholarly standard, and authors are encouraged to ensure their research is well-presented, advancing the understanding of human-robot interaction, adding cutting-edge or general insights to the field, or challenging current perspectives in this research domain. THRI warmly invites well-crafted paper submissions from a variety of disciplines, encompassing robotics, computer science, engineering, design, and the behavioral and social sciences. The scholarly articles published in THRI may cover a range of topics such as the nature of human interactions with robots and robotic technologies, methods to enhance or enable novel forms of interaction, and the societal or organizational impacts of these interactions. The editorial team is also keen on receiving proposals for special issues that focus on specific technical challenges or that apply human-robot interaction research to further areas like social computing, consumer behavior, health, and education.
期刊最新文献
Influence of Simulation and Interactivity on Human Perceptions of a Robot During Navigation Tasks Converging Measures and an Emergent Model: A Meta-Analysis of Human-Machine Trust Questionnaires Generating Pattern-Based Conventions for Predictable Planning in Human-Robot Collaboration Classification of Co-manipulation Modus with Human-Human Teams for Future Application to Human-Robot Systems Perceptions of a Robot that Interleaves Tasks for Multiple Users
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1