Abstract

Given the widespread goal of endowing robotic systems with interactional capabilities that would allow users to deal with them intuitively by using means of natural communication, the text addresses the question to which extent it would be possible to mathematize (aspects of) social interaction. Using the example of a robotic museum guide in a real-world scenario, central challenges in dealing with the situatedness and contingency of human communicational conduct are shown using fine-grained video analysis combining the robot’s internal perspective with the user’s view. On a conceptual level, the text argues to consider human and robot as one ‘interactional system’ that jointly solves a practical (communicational) task. This opens up the perspective to integrate the human’s interactional competences and adaptability in the design and modeling of interactional building blocks for HRI. If we provide the technical system with systematic resources to make use of the human’s competences, the limits of mathematization might gain an interesting twist. Through careful design of the robot’s conduct, a powerful resource exists for the robot to pro-actively influence the users’ expectations about relevant subsequent actions, so that the robot could contribute to establishing the conditions which would be most beneficial to its own functioning.

Highlights

  • Research in Social Robotics strives to endow robotic systems with interactional capabilities that allow users to deal with them intuitively by using means of natural communication and social interaction

  • Rule-based approaches to discourse modeling stand in direct conceptual contrast to the openness and unpredictability of social interaction, and it is unclear on what grounds a technical system can select an appropriate and relevant subsequent action

  • (2) we have developed a vision and a conceptual basis of how the limitations of technical systems in dealing with the situatedness of human social interaction might be pushed a little further

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Research in Social Robotics strives to endow robotic systems with interactional capabilities that allow users to deal with them intuitively by using means of natural communication and social interaction This goal is particulary challenging because of the discrepancy between the situatedness, contingency and indexicality of human social conduct and the formalized descriptions required to program technical systems (Suchman 1987). Levinson (2006: 45/56) points out that there is ‘‘no such thing as a formal grammar of discourse’’ because interaction is ‘‘governed not by rule but by expectations’’ (see Schegloff 1996; Button 1990; Luhmann 1984) This becomes evident at times that require a high degree of interactional coordination between co-participants, such as the opening of an encounter and attempts to establish co-orientation (e.g., Pitsch et al 2013, 2014). If we can provide the technical system with systematic resources to make use of them (Pitsch et al 2013), the limits of formalization might gain an interesting twist

Goal: intuitive human–machine interface or reproducing human communication?
Mathematization: transforming communication for real-world HRI
Example of real-world human–robot interaction: a robotic museum guide
Shaping expectations
Uncertainty of the robot’s perception
Perceptual delay and diverging representations
Confusion with regard to sequential structures
Robot’s resources between ‘interaction’ and ‘functioning’
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call