Supporting Complex Robot Behaviors with Simple Interaction Tools

Abstract

This chapter examines the potential for new mixed-initiative interaction methods and tools to change the way people think about and use robot behaviors. Although new sensors, processing algorithms, and mobility platforms continue to emerge, a remarkable observation is that for the vast majority of fielded systems, the basic inputs and outputs used to communicate between humans and robots have not changed dramatically since mobile robots were used in surprising numbers during World War II. Photographs and old books from the period show that small tracked unmanned ground vehicles were teleoperated for a variety of military missions. Today, video remains the predominant mechanism for providing situation awareness from the robot to the human. Direct control of translational and rotational velocity remains the predominant input from the human to the robot. The problem is not that researchers have failed to create behaviors and autonomy. A preponderance of semi-autonomous capabilities are now available on laboratory robots However, the resulting interaction is often complex and the robot's actions may seem mysterious to robot operators. Autonomy may actually increase the complexity of the task rather than decrease it. Without the right interaction metaphor, users do not know what to expect from their mysterious and complex robot "peers." As behavioral autonomy increases, the answer to the question: "What does it do?" may become increasingly difficult to answer. This is especially true for behaviors that are adaptive or which exhibit emergent effects and/or non-determinism. The trick then, is to make the user comfortable with these behaviors by communicating behavioral intentionality. The interface should make clear what the robot is trying to accomplish with each behavior and should provide an understanding of how the behavior will affect overall mission success. Just as the development of a windows based graphical user interface vastly augmented the impact and value of the personal computer, so likewise, an upsurge in the general utility of robots may follow closely on the heels of change in the human interface. Until the recent past, robots did not exhibit sophisticated behaviors or take initiative to accomplish complex tasks. More often than not, the underlying theory of robot behavior was so trivial that it may have seemed unnecessary to give it much thought. An example is the basic notion that moving a joystick up and down will cause the robot to drive backwards and forwards. To someone who has already internalized this particular theory of robot