Investigation of Communicative Flight Paths for Small Unmanned Aerial Systems

Duncan, Brittany A.; Beachly, Evan; Bevins, Alisha; Elbaum, Sebasitan; Detweiler, Carrick

doi:10.1109/icra.2018.8462871

Cited by 13 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It is important to note the constraints on participants who were included in studies that were completed on Amazon Mechanical Turk (MTurk), which includes Phase 0 ( Duncan et al, 2018 ), Phase 1, and Phase 3. Each participant’s condition was dependent upon which of the mTurk task postings they selected.…”

Section: Experimental Methods and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Phase 0 ( Duncan et al, 2018 ) involved 64 participants in total (43 Male, 21 Female). 56 identified as Americans, 2 as Chinese, 1 Korean, 1 Japanese, 1 Indian, 2 as “Other,” and 1 did not respond.…”

Section: Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This in addition to drawing similarities to the biologically inspired avian flight paths originally identified by ( Davis, 2000 ), lead to the eight cyclic motions of: Circle, Figure-8, Left-Right, Loop, Spiral, Swoop, Undulate, and Up-Down. Further details related to these choices and this work in general can be seen in ( Duncan et al, 2018 ).…”

Section: Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Phase 0 ( Firestone et al, 2019 ) presented the same states from the earlier Phase 0 ( Duncan et al, 2018 ) to twenty in-person participants (10 Male, 10 Female) who were local to the testing location in the United States. The cultural breakdown included 10 Americans, 2 Korean, 2 Indian, and 1 of each of Hispanic, Mexican, Austrian-American, Russian, European, and “other.” As an incentive for participation they were each put into a drawing for a chance to win a $25 gift card.…”

Section: Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Participants were asked to watch 16 unique videos of a UAV flying in specific motions chosen and created from Phase 0 ( Duncan et al, 2018 ) and Phase 0 ( Firestone et al, 2019 ). This included all of the motions from Phase 0 ( Duncan et al, 2018 ), complemented with a set of motions demonstrating the taxonomic differences and most popular flight paths from Phase 0 ( Firestone et al, 2019 ).…”

Section: Exploration: Phasementioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Aerial Flight Paths for Communication

Bevins

Duncan

2021

Front. Robot. AI

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article presents an understanding of naive users’ perception of the communicative nature of unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) motions refined through an iterative series of studies. This includes both what people believe the UAV is trying to communicate, and how they expect to respond through physical action or emotional response. Previous work in this area prioritized gestures from participants to the vehicle or augmenting the vehicle with additional communication modalities, rather than communicating without clear definitions of the states attempting to be conveyed. In an attempt to elicit more concrete states and better understand specific motion perception, this work includes multiple iterations of state creation, flight path refinement, and label assignment. The lessons learned in this work will be applicable broadly to those interested in defining flight paths, and within the human-robot interaction community as a whole, as it provides a base for those seeking to communicate using non-anthropomorphic robots. We found that the Negative Attitudes towards Robots Scale (NARS) can be an indicator of how a person is likely to react to a UAV, the emotional content they are likely to perceive from a message being conveyed, and it is an indicator for the personality characteristics they are likely to project upon the UAV. We also see that people commonly associate motions from other non-verbal communication situations onto UAVs. Flight specific recommendations are to use a dynamic retreating motion from a person to encourage following, use a perpendicular motion to their field of view for blocking, simple descending motion for landing, and to use either no motion or large altitude changes to encourage watching. Overall, this research explores the communication from the UAV to the bystander through its motion, to see how people respond physically and emotionally.

show abstract

Section: Experimental Methods and Designmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Phasementioning

confidence: 99%