Advertisement

User-Adaptive Interaction in Social Robots: A Survey Focusing on Non-physical Interaction

  • Gonçalo S. Martins
  • Luís Santos
  • Jorge Dias
Survey
  • 183 Downloads

Abstract

This work presents a survey on the usage of user-adaptive techniques for human interface with Social Robots, with focus on non-physical interaction. The work is based on an analysis of a number of recent scientific works, and aims to uncover existing scientific and technological gaps which can serve as basis for future research and development work. User-adaptive systems consist of autonomous agents that are able to use some manner of information on their user in order to adapt to them. Through their adaptive nature, these systems have been shown to be easier to accept by end-users, and to lead to improvements in a myriad of objective and subjective performance measurements. Thus, in the context of a growing domestic Social Robot industry, it becomes of key importance to study the scientific and technological frontiers of this field. In order to uncover potential lines of future research, we propose a taxonomy for the classification of works, which we use to analyse the works under survey, exposing the current scientific frontiers of the area. Aiming to establish the overall readiness of the field, we also analyse the maturity of the works under survey, exposing the current technological level of the techniques at hand and discussing a number of technological challenges.

Keywords

User-adaptive systems Social robotics User modelling Survey 

Notes

Funding

This work was funded by the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme - Societal Challenge 1 (DG CONNECT/H) under grant agreement No 643647 (Project GrowMeUp).

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflicts of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Abdo N, Stachniss C, Spinello L, Burgard W (2015) Robot, organize my shelves! Tidying up objects by predicting user preferences. In: 2015 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), pp 1557–1564Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Aldebaran. Pepper, the humanoid robot from Aldebaran, a genuine companion. https://www.ald.softbankrobotics.com/en/cool-robots/pepper
  3. 3.
    Aly A (2014) Towards an interactive human-robot relationship: developing a customized robot’s behavior to human’s profile, p 181Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aly A, Tapus A (2013) A model for synthesizing a combined verbal and nonverbal behavior based on personality traits in human-robot interaction. In: ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction, pp 325–332Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Amirabdollahian F, Op Den Akker R, Bedaf S, Bormann R, Draper H, Evers V, Gelderblom GJ, Ruiz CG, Hewson D, Hu N, Iacono I, Koay KL, Krose B, Marti P, Michel H, Prevot-Huille H, Reiser U, Saunders J, Sorell T, Dautenhahn K (2013) Accompany: acceptable robotics companions for ageing years - multidimensional aspects of human–system interactions. In: 2013 6th international conference on human system interactions, HSI 2013, pp 570–577Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Amoia M, Gardent C, Perez-beltrachini L (2015) Learning a second language with a socially assistive robot. Test 5Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Aylett R, Kappas A, Castellano G, Bull S, Barendregt W, Paiva A, Hall L (2015) I know how that feels—an empathic robot tutor. eChallenges e-2015 Conference, pp 1–9Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Emmanuel Senft B (2015) Paul Baxter, James Kennedy, and Tony Belpaeme. Supervised progressively autonomous robot competencies, SPARCGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Baraka K, Paiva A, Veloso M (2016) Expressive lights for revealing mobile service robot state. Adv Intell Syst Comput 417:107–119Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Baraka K, Veloso M (2015) Adaptive interaction of persistent robots to user temporal preferences. International conference on social robotics. Springer, Berlin, pp 61–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Broz F, Nourbakhsh I, Simmons R (2013) Planning for human-robot interaction in socially situated tasks: the impact of representing time and intention. Int J Soc Robot 5(2):193–214CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Burr Settles (2012) Active LearningGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chiang HH, Chen YL, Lin CT (2013) Human–robot interactive assistance of a robotic walking support system in a home environment. In: Proceedings of the international symposium on consumer electronics, ISCE, pp 263–264Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cross N (1987) Computers and people, vol 8Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    de Graaf MMA (2015) Living with robots: investigating the user acceptance of social robots in domestic environments. Ph,D, thesisGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Devin S, Alami R (2016) An implemented theory of mind to improve human–robot shared plans execution. In: International conference on human–robot interaction, pp 319–326Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Duque I, Dautenhahn K, Koay KL, Willcock L, Christianson B (2013) A different approach of using Personas in human–robot interaction: integrating personas as computational models to modify robot companions’ behaviour. In: Proceedings—IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, pp 424–429Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Eckert M, López M, Lázaro C, Meneses J, Ortega JFM (2015) MoKey—a motion based keyboard interpreter, pp 4–5Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Efthimiou E, Fotinea S, Goulas T, Dimou A, Koutsombogera M, Pitsikalis V, Maragos P, Tzafestas C (2016) In: The MOBOT platform—showcasing multimodality in human–assistive robot interaction, vol 1, pp 382–391Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Ferreira JF, Dias J (2014) Probabilistic approaches for robotic perception. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Fiore M, Khambhaita H (2015) An adaptive and proactive human–aware robot guideGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Fischinger D, Einramhof P, Papoutsakis K, Wohlkinger W, Mayer P, Panek P, Hofmann S, Koertner T, Weiss A, Argyros A, Vincze M (2014) Hobbit, a care robot supporting independent living at home: first prototype and lessons learned. Robot Autonom Syst 75:60–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Fisher R (2008) CVonline: the evolving, distributed, non-proprietary, on-line compendium of computer visionGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gao Y, Chang HJ, Demiris Y (2015) User modelling for personalised dressing assistance by humanoid robots. In: 2015 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pp 1840–1845Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ghallab M, Nau D, Traverso P (2016) Automated planning and acting. Cambridge University Press, CambridgezbMATHGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Gordon G, Spaulding S, Westlund JK, Lee JJ, Plummer L, Martinez M, Das M, Breazeal C (2016) Affective personalization of a social robot tutor for children’s second language skills. In: Proceedings of the 30th conference on artificial intelligence (AAAI 2016), pp 3951–3957Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Gordon G, Breazeal C (2015) Bayesian active learning-based robot tutor for children’ s word-reading skills. Aaai, pp 1343–1349Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Gordon G, Spaulding S, Kory J, Joo J (2012) Affective personalization of a social robot tutor for children’ s second language skillsGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Grosinger J, Pecora F, Saffiotti A (2016) Making robots proactive through equilibrium maintenance. In: Ijcai, pp 3375–3381Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Huang C-M, Mutlu B (2016) Anticipatory robot control for efficient human–robot collaboration. In: Human–robot interaction (section V)Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Blue Frog Robotics Inc. (2016) Buddy: your companion robot. http://www.bluefrogrobotics.com/en/buddy-your-companion-robot/
  32. 32.
    Kanda T, Sato R, Saiwaki N, Ishiguro H (2007) A two-month field trial in an elementary school for long-term human-robot interaction. IEEE Trans Robot 23(5):962–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Kanda T, Hirano T, Eaton D, Ishiguro H (2004) Interactive robots as social partners and peer tutors for children: a field trial. Human Comput Interact 19:61–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Karami AB, Sehaba K, Encelle B (2016) Adaptive artificial companions learning from users feedback. Adapt Behav 24(2):69–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Karami AB, Mouaddib A (2011) A decision model of adaptive interaction selection for a robot companion. In: Proceedings of the 5th european conference on mobile robots, ECMR’11, pp 83–88Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Karami AB, Sehaba K, Encelle B (2013) Towards adaptive robots based on interaction traces: a user study. In: 2013 16th international conference on advanced robotics (ICAR), pp 1–6Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Karami AB, Sehaba K, Encelle B (2014) Learn to adapt based on users’ feedback. In: The 23rd IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Karami AB, Sehaba K, Encelle B (2013) Adaptive and personalised robots—learning from users’ feedback. In: Proceedings—international conference on tools with artificial intelligence, ICTAI, pp 626–632Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Kim HG, Yang JY, Kwon DS (2015) Experience based domestic environment and user adaptive cleaning algorithm of a robot cleaner. In: 2014 11th international conference on ubiquitous robots and ambient intelligence, URAI 2014 (Urai), pp 176–178Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Kim HJ, Choi YS (2013) Eating activity recognition for health and wellness: a case study on Asian eating style. In: Digest of technical papers—IEEE international conference on consumer electronics, vol 1, pp 446–447Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Klee SD, Ferreira BQ, Silva R, Costeira P, Melo FS, Veloso M (2015) Personalized assistance for dressing users. In: 7th international conference on social robotics (ICSR ). Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Kobsa A (2001) Generic user modeling systems. User Model User Adapt Interact 11(1–2):49–63CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Konstan JA, Riedl J (2012) Recommender systems: from algorithms to user experience. User Model User Adapt Interact 22(1–2):101–123CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Lakiotaki K, Matsatsinis NF, Tsoukiàs A (2011) Multicriteria user modeling in recommender systems. IEEE Intell Syst 26(2):64–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Lam C, Yang AY, Driggs-campbell K, Bajcsy R, Sastry SS (2015) Improving human-in-the-loop decision making in multi-mode driver assistance systems using hidden mode stochastic hybrid systemsGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Li Y, Tee KP, Yan R, Chan WL, Wu Y, Limbu DK (2015) Adaptive optimal control for coordination in physical human–robot interaction. In: IEEE international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS). IEEEGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Lim GH, Hong SW, Lee I, IH Suh, Beetz M (2013) Robot recommender system using affection-based episode ontology for personalization. In: Proceedings—IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, pp 155–160Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Nichola L, Erin W, Heather P (2016) Effects of voice-adaptation and social dialogue on perceptions of a robotic learning companion. In: Human-robot, interaction, pp 255–262Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Madureira A, Cunha B, Pereira JP, Gomes S, Pereira I, Santos JM, Abraham A (2014) Using personas for supporting user modeling on scheduling systems. In: 14th international conference on hybrid intelligent systems (HIS), pp 279–284. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Martins GS, Ferreira P, Santos L, Dias J (2016) A context-aware adaptability model for service robots. In: IJCAI-2016 workshop on autonomous mobile service robots, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Martins GS, Santos L, Dias J (2015) The GrowMeUp project and the applicability of action recognition techniques. In: Dias J, Escolano F, Ezzopardi G, Marfil R (eds) Third workshop on recognition and action for scene understanding (REACTS). Ruiz de AlozaGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Matsubara T, Miro JV, Tanaka D, Poon J, Sugimoto K (2015) Sequential intention estimation of a mobility aid user for intelligent navigational assistance. In: 24th IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (RO-MAN), pp 444–449. IEEEGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Mavridis N (2015) A review of verbal and non-verbal human-robot interactive communication. Robot Autonom Syst 63(P1):22–35MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    McTear MF (1993) User modelling for adaptive computer systems: a survey of recent developments. Artif Intell Rev 7(3–4):157–184CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Mead R, Matarić M (2015) Toward robot adaptation of human speech and gesture parameters in a unified framework of proxemics and multimodal communication. In: 2015 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation workshop on machine learning for social robotsGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Miñón R, Moreno L, Martínez P, Abascal J (2014) An approach to the integration of accessibility requirements into a user interface development method. Sci Comput Program 86:58–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Moustris G, Geravand M, Tzafestas C, Peer A (2016) User-adaptive shared control in a mobility assistance robot based on human-centered intention reading and decision making schemes, pp 1–4Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Müller S, Sprenger S, Gross H-M (2014) OfficeMate: a study of an online learning dialog system for mobile assistive robots. In: ADAPTIVE 2014, the sixth international conference on adaptive and self-adaptive systems and applications (Adaptive), pp 104–110Google Scholar
  59. 59.
    Muller S, Sprenger S, Gross HM (2014) Online adaptation of dialog strategies based on probabilistic planning. In: Proceedings—IEEE international workshop on robot and human interactive communication, 2014-Octob(October), vol 692–697Google Scholar
  60. 60.
    Stefanos N, Anton K, David H, Siddhartha S (2016) Formalizing human–robot mutual adaptation: a bounded memory model. In: Human–robot, interaction, pp 75–82Google Scholar
  61. 61.
    Norcio AF, Stanley J (1989) Adaptive human-computer interfaces: a literature survey and perspective. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 19(2):399–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Papageorgiou XS, Chalvatzaki G, Dometios A, Tzafestas CS, Maragos P (2017) Intelligent assistive robotic systems for the elderly: two real-life use cases. In: PETRA ’17 proceedings of the 10th international conference on pervasive technologies related to assistive environments, pp 360–365. ACMGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Papageorgiou XS, Moustris GP, Pitsikalis V, Chalvatzaki G, Dometios A, Kardaris N, Tzafestas CS, Maragos P (2015) User-oriented cognitive interaction and control for an intelligent robotic walkerGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    ParoRobots. The paro robot. http://www.parorobots.com/
  65. 65.
    Piller F, Ihl C, Steiner F (2010) Embedded toolkits for user co-design: a technology acceptance study of product adaptability in the usage stage. In: Proceedings of the annual Hawaii international conference on system sciences, pp 1–10Google Scholar
  66. 66.
    Revelle W, Scherer KR (2005) Personality and emotion. In: Handbook of personality and affective science, pp 304–305Google Scholar
  67. 67.
    Roboticstrends. The jibo robot. http://www.roboticstrends.com/company/jibo
  68. 68.
    Ros R, Baroni I, Demiris Y (2014) Adaptive human-robot interaction in sensorimotor task instruction: from human to robot dance tutors. Robot Autonom Syst 62(6):707–720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Rossi S, Ferland F, Tapus A (2017) User profiling and behavioral adaptation for HRI: a survey. Pattern Recognit Lett 99:3–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Santos L, Khoshhal K, Dias J, Khoshhala K, Dias J (2015) Trajectory-based human action segmentation. Pattern Recognit 48(2):568–579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Sanz I, Museros L, Falomir Z, Gonzalez-Abril L (2015) Customizing a qualitative colour description for adaptability and usability. Pattern Recognit Lett 67:2–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Sarabia M, Lee K, Demiris Y (2015) Towards a synchronised grammars framework for adaptive musical human–robot collaboration. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international symposium on robot and human interactive communication (to appear)Google Scholar
  73. 73.
    Schadenberg BR, Neerincx MA, Cnossen F, Looije R (2017) Personalising game difficulty to keep children motivated to play with a social robot: a Bayesian approach. Cognit Syst Res 43:222–231CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Sekmen A, Challa P (2013) Assessment of adaptive human-robot interactions. Knowl Syst 42:49–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Sequeira P, Melo FS, Paiva A (2014) Learning by appraising: an emotion-based approach to intrinsic reward design. Adapt Behav 22(5):330–349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Shen Q, Dautenhahn K, Saunders J, Kose H (2015) Can real-time, adaptive human-robot motor coordination improve humans’ overall perception of a robot? IEEE Trans Autonom Mental Dev 7(1):52–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Smith JS, Chao C, Thomaz AL (2015) Real-time changes to social dynamics in human–robot turn-taking, pp 3024–3029Google Scholar
  78. 78.
    Taha T, Mir JV (2011) A POMDP framework for modelling human interaction with assistive robotsGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Tapus A, Tapus C, Mataric M (2008) User-robot personality matching and robot behavior adaptation for post-stroke rehabilitation therapy. Intell Serv Robot 1(2):169–183CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Triebel R, Arras K, Alami R, Beyer L, Breuers S, Chatila R, Chetouani M, Cremers D, Evers V, Joosse M, Khambhaita H, Kucner T, Leibe B, Lilienthal AJ, Linder T, Lohse M, Magnusson M, Okal B, Palmieri L, Rafi U, Van Rooij M, Zhang L (2016) SPENCER: a socially aware service robot for passenger guidance and help in busy airports, pp 1–14Google Scholar
  81. 81.
    Van Den Broeck J, Rossi G, Dierckx E, De Clercq B (2012) Age-neutrality of the NEO-PI-R: potential differential item functioning in older versus younger adults. J Psychopathol Behav Assess 34:361–369CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    Vinciarelli A (2014) More personality in personality computing. IEEE Trans Affect Comput 5(3):297–300CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Vinciarelli A, Mohammadi G (2014) A survey of personality computing. IEEE Trans Affect Comput 5(3):273–291CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Wada K, Shibata T (2006) Robot therapy in a care house—its sociopsychological and physiological effects on the residents. In: Proceedings 2006 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, 2006. ICRA 2006 (May), pp 3966–3971Google Scholar
  85. 85.
    Zhang H, Zhou W, Reardon C, Parker LE (2014) Simplex-based 3D spatio-temporal feature description for action recognition. In: The IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition (CVPR)Google Scholar
  86. 86.
    Zhang H, Ping W, Beck A, Zhang Z, Gao X (2016) Adaptive incremental learning of image semantics with application to social robot. Neurocomputing 173:93–101CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature B.V. 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gonçalo S. Martins
    • 1
  • Luís Santos
    • 1
  • Jorge Dias
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Institute of Systems and RoboticsUniversity of CoimbraCoimbraPortugal
  2. 2.Khalifa University of Science, Technology and Research (KUSTAR)Abu DhabiUAE

Personalised recommendations