Perspectives on Human-Robot Team Performance from an Evaluation of the DARPA Robotics Challenge
The DARPA Robotics Challenge (DRC) was a competition designed to advance the capabilities of remotely teleoperated semi-autonomous humanoid robots performing in a disaster response scenario with degraded communications. Throughout the DRC, our evaluation team conducted two studies of human-robot interaction (HRI) for the Trials and Finals competitions. From these studies, we have generated recommendations and design guidelines for HRI with remote, semi-autonomous humanoids, but our findings also have implications outside of the competition’s domain. In this article, we discuss our perspectives on effective and ineffective human-robot teams based upon our experiences at the DRC. We consider the impact of various interfacing and control techniques, the effect of versatile robot design on task performance, and the operational context under which these factors work together to function in a human-centric environment. We use these underlying components of HRI to review how the advancements made at the DRC can be applied to present day robot applications and key capabilities for effective human-robot teams in the future.
This research has been supported in part by DARPA under W31P4Q-13-C-0136. The views, opinions, and/or findings expressed are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official views or policies of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government. Approved for Public Release, Distribution Unlimited. The authors would like to thank DARPA, the staff members of the DRC, and all affiliated personnel that enabled this research. Thank you to Josh Peri for his assistance with data analysis. In particular, thank you to all of the teams that consented to participate in our studies over the years.
- Atkeson, C. G., Babu, B. P. W., Banerjee, N., Berenson, D., Bove, C. P., Cui, X. et al. (2015). No falls, no resets: Reliable humanoid behavior in the DARPA robotics challenge. In 2015 IEEE-RAS 15th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids) (pp. 623–630).Google Scholar
- Blitch, J. G. (2003). Adaptive mobility for rescue robots. In Proceedings of SPIE Sensors, and Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (C3I) Technologies for Homeland Defense and Law Enforcement II (Vol. 5071, pp. 315–321).Google Scholar
- Cisneros, R., Nakaoka, S. I., Morisawa, M., Kaneko, K., Kajita, S., Sakaguchi, T., et al. (2016). Effective teleoperated manipulation for humanoid robots in partially unknown real environments: Team AIST-NEDO’s approach for performing the plug task during the DRC finals. Advanced Robotics, 30(24), 1544–1558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Goodrich, M. A., & Olsen, D. R. (2003). Seven principles of efficient human robot interaction. In IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (Vol. 4, pp. 3942–3948).Google Scholar
- Jameson, S. M. (2001). Architectures for distributed information fusion to support situation awareness on the digital battlefield. In 4th International Conference on Data Fusion (pp. 7–10).Google Scholar
- Keyes, B., Casey, R., Yanco, H. A., Maxwell, B. A., Georgiev, Y. (2006). Camera placement and multi-camera fusion for remote robot operation. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Safety, Security and Rescue Robotics (pp. 22–24).Google Scholar
- Keyes, B., Micire, M., Drury, J. L., & Yanco, H. A. (2010). Improving human-robot interaction through interface evolution. In D. Chugo (Ed.), Human-robot interaction (pp. 183–202).Google Scholar
- Stepanova, E. R., von der Heyde, M., Kitson, A., Schiphorst, T., & Riecke, B. E. (2017). Gathering and applying guidelines for mobile robot design for urban search and rescue application. In International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction 2017 (pp. 562–581).Google Scholar