2011
DOI: 10.1007/s12369-011-0108-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How Can I Help?

Abstract: Social interaction between humans takes place in the spatial environment on a daily basis. We occupy space for ourselves and respect the dynamics of spaces that are occupied by others. In human-robot interaction, spatial models are commonly used for structuring relatively far-away interactions or passing-by scenarios. This work instead, focuses on the transition between distant and close communication for an interaction opening. We applied a spatial model to a humanoid robot and implemented an attention system… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

2
13
0
2

Year Published

2014
2014
2021
2021

Publication Types

Select...
5
3
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 27 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 26 publications
(26 reference statements)
2
13
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…-Gaze behavior: although Holthaus et al [58] employed robots with occasional random gazes and slight body movements to signal availability, we chose to characterize the neutral robot with a static gaze direction throughout the interaction [49] in order to differentiate it more from the dynamic gaze of friendly interaction style; -A fixed posture with arms along to the body and with open hands slightly moving [34]. This was realized by keeping the robot in the "autonomous life" but disabling gestures in animated speech boxes; -Low tone of voice (50%) and low speed of speech (80%)…”
Section: Neutral Peppermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…-Gaze behavior: although Holthaus et al [58] employed robots with occasional random gazes and slight body movements to signal availability, we chose to characterize the neutral robot with a static gaze direction throughout the interaction [49] in order to differentiate it more from the dynamic gaze of friendly interaction style; -A fixed posture with arms along to the body and with open hands slightly moving [34]. This was realized by keeping the robot in the "autonomous life" but disabling gestures in animated speech boxes; -Low tone of voice (50%) and low speed of speech (80%)…”
Section: Neutral Peppermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Group interaction introduces new factors that can affect and should be studied in HRI, such as characteristics of the human group (Sabanovic et al, 2006 ; Johansson and Skantze, 2015 ). Researchers have also begun to address solutions to group technical problems, such as tracking multiple people in group configurations (Holthaus et al, 2011 ; Taylor and Riek, 2016 ; Tseng et al, 2016 ) or switching attention between multiple people (Bennewitz et al, 2005 ). However, there are many open questions as to how varied group social dynamics in HRI should be addressed.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The behaviors are transformation units; they map the percept to an appropriate head gaze act. The [25,27,45]. The motor schema represents the template for physical activities and is connected to the actuators [48].…”
Section: Resulting Reference Architecturementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The strength of act r may be modified by a gain G, which may amplify or reduce the contribution of an individual behavior to the overall behavior. Examples of gains in social head gaze are covariate factors such as culture, gender, or proxemics, which are identified to have a significant influence on head gaze [25,27,49,50,68]. Table 2 illustrates a social head gaze example using behavioral robotics terminologies; the terminologies from ethology are also included for readers familiar with that field.…”
Section: Construction Of Conceptual Architecturesmentioning
confidence: 99%