Polly: Telepresence from a Guide’s Shoulder
Polly is an inexpensive, portable telepresence device based on the metaphor of a parrot riding a guide’s shoulder and acting as proxy for remote participants. Although remote users may be anyone with a desire for ‘tele-visits’, we focus on limited mobility users. We present a series of prototypes and field tests that informed design iterations. Our current implementations utilize a smartphone on a stabilized, remotely controlled gimbal that can be hand held, placed on perches or carried by wearable frame. We describe findings from trials at campus, museum and faire tours with remote users, including quadriplegics. We found guides were more comfortable using Polly than a phone and that Polly was accepted by other people. Remote participants appreciated stabilized video and having control of the camera. One challenge is negotiation of movement and view control. Our tests suggest Polly is an effective alternative to telepresence robots, phones or fixed cameras.
KeywordsTelepresence Image stabilization Remote guiding Wearable Gimbal User feedback Iterative design
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.Ryan, R.M., Deci, E.L.: Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist (1) 68–78Google Scholar
- 3.Drugge, M., Nilsson, M., Parviainen, R., Parnes, P.: Experiences of using wearable computers for ambient telepresence and remote interaction. In: Proc. 2004 ACM SIGMM Workshop on Effective Telepresence, pp. 2–11. ACM (2004)Google Scholar
- 5.Mayol-Cuevas, W., Kurata, T.: Tutorial: Computer vision for wearable visual interface. Workingpaperimportmodel: Workingpaperimportmodel University of Bristol Other page information: - Other identifier: 2000803 (2005)Google Scholar
- 6.Goldberg, K.Y., Song, D., Khor, Y.N., Pescovitz, D., Levandowski, A., Himmelstein, J.C., Shih, J., Ho, A., Paulos, E., Donath, J.S.: Collaborative online teleoperation with spatial dynamic voting and a human “tele-actor”. In: ICRA, pp. 1179–1184. IEEE (2002)Google Scholar
- 7.Tsumaki, Y., Ono, F., Tsukuda, T.: The 20-DOF miniature humanoid MH-2: A wearable communication system. In: ICRA, pp. 3930–3935 (2012)Google Scholar
- 8.Kashiwabara, T., Osawa, H., Shinozawa, K., Imai, M.: Teroos: a wearable avatar to enhance joint activities. In: Proc. 2012 ACM Annual Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2001–2004. ACM (2012)Google Scholar
- 9.Adalgeirsson, S.O., Breazeal, C.: Mebot: A robotic platform for socially embodied presence. In: Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction. HRI 2010, pp. 15–22, Piscataway. IEEE Press (2010)Google Scholar
- 10.Kristoffersson, A., Coradeschi, S., Loutfi, A.: A review of mobile robotic telepresence. Adv. in Hum.-Comp. Int. 2013, 3:3–3:3, January 2013Google Scholar
- 12.Merritt, E.: Center for the future of museums blog, May 2014. http://futureofmuseums.blogspot.com/2014/05/exploring-robots-for-access ibility-in.html
- 13.Butterill, J.: Virtual Photowalks (2013). http://www.virtualphotowalks.org/
- 14.Liu, Q., Kimber, D., Foote, J., Wilcox, L., Boreczky, J.: Flyspec: A multi-user video camera system with hybrid human and automatic control. In: Proceedings of the Tenth ACM International Conference on Multimedia. MULTIMEDIA 2002, pp. 484–492, New York. ACM (2002)Google Scholar