The intuitive collaboration of humans and intelligent robots (embodied AI) in the real-world is an essential objective for many desirable applications of robotics. Whilst there is much research regarding explicit communication, we focus on how humans and robots interact implicitly, on motor adaptation level. We present a real-world setup of a humanrobot collaborative maze game, designed to be non-trivial and only solvable through collaboration, by limiting the actions to rotations of two orthogonal axes, and assigning each axes to one player. This results in neither the human nor the agent being able to solve the game on their own. We use a stateof-the-art reinforcement learning algorithm for the robotic agent, and achieve results within 30 minutes of real-world play, without any type of pre-training. We then use this system to perform systematic experiments on human/agent behaviour and adaptation when co-learning a policy for the collaborative game. We present results on how co-policy learning occurs over time between the human and the robotic agent resulting in each participant's agent serving as a representation of how they would play the game. This allows us to relate a person's success when playing with different agents than their own, by comparing the policy of the agent with that of their own agent.
This paper presents the safety/ training conditions that exist in a decade where there are "no profit" dayrates. Safety and training programs have been condensed because of limited funds for these functions, however, the continued effort of the drilling contractor to improve safety has not decreased. For the past fifteen years, the drilling contractors have invested billions of dollars on effective training and safety programs for employees. Reduced revenues of the last 5 years have resulted in curtailment of full time safety/training personnel, however the programs that are still active afford safe operations. Safety and training continue to be a major emphasis of the oil company (Operator) and of the drilling contractor, and the contractor's field supervisors historically were trained to effectively continue safety and training programs. However, due to short term contracts and low dayrates, attrition is taking its toll. The contractor has major concerns about the people manning his operations. The experience level has dropped. The employee no longer has a feel for future employment and drugs/alcohol abuse have complicated the situation. The Operators have not changed their requirements for safety and in many cases have tied safety records with the awarding of future contracts to get an adequate effort for safety by all contractors. In the future, to insure adequate safety and training, the Operator must monetarily compensate the con-, tractor who does have good safety and training programs. The Operator company executive who today has a very profitable operation must be realistic and support the contractor on safety matters. The contractor's field supervisor must also be realistic and he must assume more responsibility to think safety and train his crews to be continually-minded of safety. Everyone must bear the cost of safety - from the corporation executives to rig crew employees. The drilling contractor is caught in the middle during this decade of hard times. The industry cannot have the Ostrich Syndrome and just want safety. The Operator must recognize that they cannot expect the contractor to spend money which he does not have available to pay the entire bill for the degree of safety which they want, which is prudent, and which is mandated by Federal and State laws. Safety programs cost money, and it will be necessary for the Operator to share in this cost. If contractor personnel know their company is being compensated for better safety, their personnel will increase interest to support safety. If the Operator gives only lip service and puts all the burden on the contractor this weakens the message to man on the rig. It has been suggested that Operator pay $200/day per day the rig is on contract. This money is paid to the contractor and is earmarked for rig safety programs. This would insure that all contractors are improving their safety programs. This incentive would be recognized by all the crew as a cooperative action of the Operator and the contractor to invest in their future. There are other incentive programs that could be sponsored by the Operator that would help the entire petroleum industry maintain the improvements made in safety and training over the past decade (Figure 1). In addition, there are specific operations that are controlled by the Operators that require improvements to help maintain the contractor safety. One example is the better packaging for handling of materials (i.e. materials from supply boat to drilling rig). The drilling contractor working with the Operators using current technology will improve safety. Fig. 1Lost-time accident frequency. Low bid should not be the only consideration for awarding drilling contracts. Safety, training and rig maintenance should be equal considerations.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.