![]() ![]() Yet the performance differences between virtual and physical arms have not yet been explored. Results showed that arms were subjectively more well received. compared AR arms to other types of AR annotations (e.g., arrows ). studied the use of an AR arm on a mobile robot, and Hamilton et al. ĪR has also been recently used to provide a lower-cost solution for gestural capabilities. ![]() Recently, AR technology has also been employed to visualize robot facial cues, allowing users or designers to customize expressions and easily change between facial expressions. Similarly, many approaches use tablets to display robot faces (e.g., ). The Furhat robot head, for example, uses projection mapping to display a humanlike face without the need for precisely controlled animatronic facial parts. For nonverbal facial cues, this has taken a variety of forms. To address these challenges, researchers have investigated virtual analogues to these traditional non-verbal cues. Additionally, the inclusion of physical components like arms presents well-known safety concerns. Moreover, the high degree-of-freedom requirements and complex mechanics of these morphological components, especially physical arms, present cost barriers, especially when such components would only be used for gesturing and not for manipulation. Unfortunately, most robot systems (such as mobile or telepresence robots, autonomous vehicles, and free-flying drones) do not have the physical morphology to express many of these nonverbal cues, lacking heads and eyes for gazing, or arms for gesturing. These non-verbal behaviors, especially deictic gestures like pointing and presenting, are particularly important as they increase task efficiency and improve subjective perceptions of robots. Multimodal approaches pairing these nonverbal displays with verbal communication have also been well-studied (e.g., ). Due to robots’ unique physical embodiment, human-robot interaction (HRI) researchers have investigated non-verbal behaviors, such as implicit arm movement (e.g., ), gestures, and eye gaze. ![]() Critically, this requires going beyond verbal communication alone. In order to promote natural, human-like, and effective human-robot interactions, robots must be able to effectively communicate with people. (d) Physical Robot with a virtual (AR) arm pointing to an virtual (AR) referent (V→V)įigure 1: We investigate referring behavior at the intersection of physical and AR worlds (physical/virtual (AR) arm × physical/virtual (AR) referent). In Proceedings of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI ’23). Crossing Reality: Comparing Physical and Virtual Robot Deixis. Zhao Han, Yifei Zhu, Albert Phan, Fernando Sandoval Garza, Amia Castro, and Tom Williams.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |