Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Modeling Framework for User-Driven Iterative Design of Autonomous Systems

  • Published:
International Journal of Social Robotics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Many researchers in human-robot interaction have acknowledged the fact that iterative design is necessary to optimize the robots for the interaction with the users. However, few iterative user studies have been reported. We believe that one reason for this is that setting up systems for iterative studies is cumbersome because the system architectures do not support iterative design. In the paper, we address this problem by interlinking usability research with system development. In a first user study, we identify requirements and concepts for a new framework that eases the employment of autonomous robots in the iterative design process. With a second user study we show how robot behaviors are implemented in the new framework and how it enables the developer to efficiently make changes to these behaviors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Please note that this scale applies for all following items.

  2. http://www.lat-mpi.eu/tools/elan/.

  3. The PTA is the component for person tracking and attention (see [20]).

References

  1. Adams JA (2005) Human-robot interaction design: understanding user needs and requirements. In: Proceedings of the 2005 human factors and ergonomics society 49th annual meeting, Orlando, FL

    Google Scholar 

  2. Barnett J, Akolkar R, Auburn R, Bodell M, Burnett D, Carter J, McGlashan S, Lager T, Helbing M, Hosn R et al (2007) State chart xml (scxml): state machine notation for control. In: W3C working draft

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bartneck C, Kulić D, Croft E, Zoghbi S (2009) Measurement instruments for the anthropomorphism, animacy, likeability, perceived intelligence, and perceived safety of robots. Int J Soc Robot 1(1):71–81

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Brugali D, Shakhimardanov A (2010) Component-based robotic engineering. IEEE Robot Autom Mag 17(1):100–112

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Bryson J (2010) The behavior-oriented design of modular agent intelligence. Agent technologies, infrastructures, tools, and applications for e-services. Lect Notes Comput Sci 2592:61–76

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Burghart C, Holzapfel H, Haeussling R, Breuer S (2007) Coding interaction patterns between human and receptionist robot. In: Proceedings of humanoids 2007, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  7. Clark RE (1983) Reconsidering research in learning from media. Rev Educ Res 53(4):445–459

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Clarkson E, Arkin RC (2006) Applying heuristic evaluation to human-robot interaction systems. In: Proceedings of HRI 2006

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fenton N, Pfleeger S (1991) Software metrics. Chapman & Hall, London

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Fitzpatrick P, Metta G, Natale L (2008) Towards long-lived robot genes. Robot Auton Syst 56(1):29–45

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Gamma E, Helm R, Johnson R, Vlissides J (1995) Design patterns. Addison-Wesley, Reading

    Google Scholar 

  12. Glas D, Satake S, Kanda T, Hagita N (2011) An interaction design framework for social robots. In: Proceedings of robotics: science and systems, Los Angeles, CA, USA

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hanheide M, Lohse M, Dierker A (2010) Salem—statistical analysis of elan files in matlab. In: Proceedings of workshop on multimodal corpora: advances in capturing, coding and analyzing multimodality, 7th international conference for language resources and evaluation (LREC 2010)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Harel D (1987) Statecharts: a visual formalism for complex systems. Sci Comput Program 8(3):231–274

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  15. Heerink M, Kröse B, Evers V, Wielinga B (2010) Assessing acceptance of assistive social agent technology by older adults: the almere model. Int J Soc Robot 2(4):361–375

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Joosse M, Sardar A, Lohse M, Evers V (2013) Behave-ii: the revised set of measures to assess users’ attitudinal and behavioral responses to a social robot. Int J Soc Robot 5(3):379–388

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Jüngling K, Arens M, Hanheide M, Sagerer G (2008) Fusion of perceptual processes for real-time object tracking. In: Proceedings international conference on information fusion, Cologne, Germany

    Google Scholar 

  18. Kamide H, Takubo T, Ohara K, Mae Y, Arai T (2013) Impressions of humanoids: the development of a measure for evaluating a humanoid. Int J Soc Robot. doi:10.1007/s12369-013-0187-x

    Google Scholar 

  19. Kanda T, Shimada M, Koizumi S (2012) Children learning with a social robot. In: Proceedings of HRI, pp 351–358

    Google Scholar 

  20. Lang S, Kleinehagenbrock M, Hohenner S, Fritsch J, Fink GA, Sagerer G (2003) Providing the basis for human-robot-interaction: a multi-modal attention system for a mobile robot. In: Proc int conf on multimodal interfaces, Vancouver, Canada, pp 28–35

    Google Scholar 

  21. Lanza M (2001) The evolution matrix: recovering software evolution using software visualization techniques. In: Proceedings of the 4th international workshop on principles of software evolution, pp 37–42

    Google Scholar 

  22. Lee MK, Forlizzi J, Kiesler SB, Rybski PE, Antanitis J, Savetsila S (2012) Personalization in hri: a longitudinal field experiment. In: Proceedings of HRI, pp 319–326

    Google Scholar 

  23. Leite I, Martinho C, Paiva A (2013) Social robots for long-term interaction: a survey. Int J Soc Robot 5(2):291–308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Lohse M (2010) Investigating the influence of situations and expectations on user behavior—empirical analyses in human-robot interaction. PhD thesis, Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University

  25. Lohse M (2011) The role of expectations and situations in human-robot interaction. In: New frontiers in human-robot interaction. Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 35–56

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lohse M, Hanheide M, Rohlfing K, Sagerer G (2009) Systemic interaction analysis (sina) in hri. In: Proceedings of conference on human-robot interaction (HRI)

    Google Scholar 

  27. Moratz R, Tenbrink T (2006) Spatial reference in linguistic human-robot interaction: iterative, empirically supported development of a model of projective relations. Spat Cogn Comput 6(1):63–107

    Google Scholar 

  28. Nalin M, Baroni I, Kruijff-Korbayová I, Cañamero L, Lewis M, Beck A, Cuayáhuitl H, Sanna A (2012) Children’s adaptation in multi-session interaction with a humanoid robot. In: Proceedings of RO-MAN, pp 351–357

    Google Scholar 

  29. Nylander S, Ljungblad S, Villarreal JJ (2012) A complementing approach for identifying ethical issues in care robotics—grounding ethics in practical use. In: Proceedings of RO-MAN, pp 797–802

    Google Scholar 

  30. Payr S (2010) Closing and closure in human-companion interactions: analyzing video data from a field study. In: Proceedings of RO-MAN, pp 476–481

    Google Scholar 

  31. Peltason J, Wrede B (2010) Pamini: a framework for assembling mixed-initiative human-robot interaction from generic interaction patterns. In: SIGDIAL 2010 Conference, Tokyo, Japan

    Google Scholar 

  32. Quigley M, Gerkey B, Conley K, Faust J, Foote T, Leibs J, Berger E, Wheeler R, Ng A (2009) Ros: an open-source robot operating system. In: Open-source software workshop of the international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA)

    Google Scholar 

  33. Sarvadevabhatla RK, Ng-Thow-Hing V, Okita SY (2010) Extended duration human-robot interaction: tools and analysis. In: Proceedings of RO-MAN, pp 7–14

    Google Scholar 

  34. Schneider S (2009) Integration einer humanoiden Robotikplattform in einer serviceorientierten Architektur. Master’s thesis, Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University

  35. Severinson-Eklundh K, Green A, Hüttenrauch H, Oestreicher L, Norman M (2004) Involving users in the design of a mobile office roboter. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern, Part C, Appl Rev 34(2):113–124

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Spexard TP, Hanheide M (2009) System integration supporting evolutionary development and design. In: Human centered robotic systems. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  37. Walters ML, Oskoei MA, Syrdal DS, Dautenhahn K (2011) A long-term human-robot proxemic study. In: Proceedings of RO-MAN, pp 137–142

    Google Scholar 

  38. Weiss A, Bernhaupt R, Lankes M, Tscheligi M (2009) The usus evaluation framework for human-robot interaction. In: AISB2009: Proceedings of the symposium on new frontiers in human-robot interaction, Edinburgh, Scottland, April 8–9, 2009, pp 158–165

    Google Scholar 

  39. Weiss A, Bernhaupt R, Tscheligi M (2011) The USUS evaluation framework for user-centered HRI. In: New frontiers in human-robot interaction. Benjamins, Amsterdam, pp 89–110

    Google Scholar 

  40. Wrede S (2008) An information-driven architecture for cognitive systems research. PhD thesis, Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University

  41. Wrede S, Hanheide M, Wachsmuth S, Sagerer G (2006) Integration and coordination in a cognitive vision system. In: Proceedings of international conference on computer vision systems, New York City, NY, USA

    Google Scholar 

  42. van der Zant T, Iocchi L (2011) Robocup@home: adaptive benchmarking of robot bodies and minds. In: Proceedings international conference on social robotics 2011. LNAI, vol 7072. Springer, Berlin, pp 214–225

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Twente, Enschede, Netherlands

    Manja Lohse

  2. Bielefeld University, Bielefeld, Germany

    Frederic Siepmann & Sven Wachsmuth

Authors
  1. Manja Lohse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Frederic Siepmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Sven Wachsmuth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Manja Lohse.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lohse, M., Siepmann, F. & Wachsmuth, S. A Modeling Framework for User-Driven Iterative Design of Autonomous Systems. Int J of Soc Robotics 6, 121–139 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0209-8

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-013-0209-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation