Task-Based Mixed-Initiative Coordination
Interactive teaching is a coordinated activity in many different respects. This includes intra-personal aspects, like the joint production of speech and gestures, as well as inter-personal aspects, like the processing of verbal corrections while an action is performed. Given the experimental paradigm of human-robot interaction research, coordinated activities may be changed, added, or removed in an iterative manner. To keep the system maintainable despite coordination dependencies is an architectural challenge that is systematically analyzed in the following and supported by a toolkit. In many proposed robotic software architectures, coordination of active components that carry out tasks occurs through coupled statemachines that track the shared system state. This represents a generalizable software pattern that we have identified and analyzed in a general manner for the first time.
Furthermore, in mixed-initiative Human-Robot-Interaction, tasks can be initiated by either participant, causing the active and passive roles to change. Such changes have not been addressed before and we have generalized task coordination to encompass them. Last, but not least, distributed state tracking is complex, and previous implementations have thus often placed it entirely in a centralized coordination service that, however, increases coupling. Instead, we have developed a task service toolkit, which can be embedded in components, and demonstrated that this reduces component complexity considerably, without affecting coupling. Based on it, both centralized and de-centralized coordination services are possible.
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 3.Gat, E.: Three-layer architectures. In: Kortenkamp, D., Bonasso, R.P., Murphy, R. (eds.) Artificial Intelligence and Mobile Robots, pp. 195–210. MIT Press, Cambridge (1998)Google Scholar
- 4.Hanheide, M., Sagerer, G.: Active memory-based interaction strategies for learning-enabling behaviors. In: International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, RO-MAN, Munich (2008)Google Scholar
- 5.Kortenkamp, D., Simmons, R.: Robotic System Architectures and Programming, ch. 8, pp. 187–206. Springer (2008)Google Scholar
- 6.Lefebvre, D.R., Saridis, G.N.: A computer architecture for intelligent machines. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, vol. 3, pp. 2745–2750 (1992)Google Scholar
- 7.Lütkebohle, I.: Coordination and composition patterns in the “curious robot” scenario. PhD thesis, Bielefeld University (2010)Google Scholar
- 8.Lütkebohle, I., Peltason, J., Schillingmann, L., Elbrechter, C., Wrede, B., Wachsmuth, S., Haschke, R.: The Curious Robot - Structuring Interactive Robot Learning. In: International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE (2009)Google Scholar
- 9.Lütkebohle, I., Philippsen, R., Pradeep, V., Marder-Eppstein, E., Wachsmuth, S.: Coordination and Control for Complex Robot Software Systems: The Task-State Pattern. Journal of Software Engineering for Robotics (submitted, 2011)Google Scholar
- 10.Marder-Eppstein, E., Pradeep, V.: ROS actionlib package documentation (2009), http://www.ros.org/wiki/actionlib
- 12.Nilsson, N.J.: Shakey the robot. Tech. rep., SRI International, Menlo Park, CA, USA (1984), collection of earlier reportsGoogle Scholar
- 13.Plöger, P.G., Pervölz, K., Mies, C., Eyerich, P., Brenner, M., Nebel, B.: The desire service robotics initiative. KI Zeitschrift Künstliche Intelligenz 22(4), 29–32 (2008)Google Scholar
- 16.Simmons, R., Apfelbaum, D.: A task description language for robot control. In: Proc. of Conference on Intelligent Robotics and Systems (1998)Google Scholar
- 18.Volpe, R., Nesnas, I., Estlin, T., Mutz, D., Petras, R., Das, H.: The claraty architecture for robotic autonomy. In: IEEE Proceedings Conference on Aerospace 2001, vol. 1, pp. 1/121–1/131 (2001)Google Scholar
- 19.Wrede, S., Hanheide, M., Wachsmuth, S., Sagerer, G.: Integration and coordination in a cognitive vision system. In: International Conference on Computer Vision Systems (ICVS). IEEE, St. Johns University (2006)Google Scholar