proactive release behaviors
play

Proactive Release Behaviors During Human-Robot Handovers Zhao Han, - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

The Effects of Proactive Release Behaviors During Human-Robot Handovers Zhao Han, Holly Yanco University of Massachusetts Lowell UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu


  1. The Effects of Proactive Release Behaviors During Human-Robot Handovers Zhao Han, Holly Yanco University of Massachusetts Lowell UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  2. Robot to Human Handover • Focus on release • In all conditions: – Natural arm movement – Gazes at the object 1,2 – Grasps the top part of the object 3 – Arm is extended as much as possible 3 1. Moon et al. , 2014 2. Admoni et al , 2014 3. Cakmak et al. , 2011 UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  3. Robot to Human Handover • Focus on release • In all conditions: – Natural arm movement – Gazes at the object 1,2 – Grasps the top part of the object 3 – Arm is extended as much as possible 3 1. Moon et al. , 2014 2. Admoni et al , 2014 3. Cakmak et al. , 2011 UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  4. Motivation • Three phases during a handover 1 Approach Signal Transfer • Transfer phase is vital – Failure has severe consequences • Dropped and broken 2 , which may hurt people • Bad experience 3 – Least studied 1. Strabala et al. , 2013 2. Chan et al. , 2013 3. Cakmak et al , 2011 UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  5. Three Release Behaviors • Rigid – Release when arm is extended – By checking a force threshold • Passive – Can be released after partial extension – By checking the same force threshold • Proactive – Can be released after partial extension – By checking a force change pattern UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  6. Proactive Release • Sample force pattern during a grasp Voltage (force) Time • Implementation: moving average – 90 windows of averaged data – 1 window: 180 voltage values – Release when 35% is decreasing UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  7. Methodology • Within subjects • Full counterbalancing • 36 participants – 21 male, 15 female – Age ranged from 18 to 57 (M=29, SD=12) • Data collection – Task completion time: logged – Additional timing: coding videos frame by frame – Subjective measures: Likert scale questionnaire UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  8. Preference • Among 29 participants who explicitly stated a single preference, 20 participants preferred proactive. UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  9. Handover Efficiency • Completion time (one second less in proactive) M indicates median. • Release duration 1.3 vs 1.2 vs 0.5 (seconds) (rigid vs passive vs proactive) UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  10. Overall Experience Improved • Significant differences – Fluency (*) – Ease-of-taking (***) • Trends – Trust (p=0.05) – Capability (p=0.06) • No detectable difference – Discomfort UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  11. Why is Proactive Better? • To take the object – People don’t need to pull – They simply hold or touch • People grasp differently in different trials – The fixed force threshold is not flexible – The decreasing pattern is still present UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  12. Takeaways “Very “ Less “Had to “Difficult” smooth” resistant” pull” Threshold-based Proactive release approaches • Preferred • Increased fluency and • Inefficient ease-of-taking • Bad experience “The robot “It lets it go won’t let it go” like humans do” UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

  13. Thanks! • Zhao Han: zhan@cs.uml.edu • UMass Lowell HRI Lab: robotics.cs.uml.edu • Code : github.com/uml-robotics/handover_moveit • The Effects of Proactive Release Behaviors During Human-Robot Handovers UMass Lowell Human-Robot Interaction Lab University of Massachusetts Lowell robotics.cs.uml.edu www.uml.edu

Download Presentation
Download Policy: The content available on the website is offered to you 'AS IS' for your personal information and use only. It cannot be commercialized, licensed, or distributed on other websites without prior consent from the author. To download a presentation, simply click this link. If you encounter any difficulties during the download process, it's possible that the publisher has removed the file from their server.

Recommend


More recommend