Managing Control, Convenience and Autonomy - A Study of Agent Autonomy in Intelligent Environments

There are many arguments for and against the use of autonomous-agents in ambient intelligence and intelligent environments. Some researchers maintain that it is vital to restrict autonomy of agents so that users have complete control over the system; whereas, many others maintain that there is a greater benefit to be gained by employing autonomous-agents to take some of the work load off the user and increase user convenience. Both of these approaches have their distinct advantages but they are not suitable for all since people's opinions and concerns regarding autonomy are highly individual and can differ greatly from person to person. This work explores how it is possible to make intelligent environments more dynamic and personalisable by equipping them with adjustable autonomy, which allows the user to increase or decrease agent autonomy in order to find a comfortable sweet-spot between relinquishing/maintaining control and gaining/losing convenience. This chapter discusses how adjustable autonomy can be achieved in intelligent environments, reports on a recent online survey conducted to gauge people's opinions of different levels of in intelligent environments, and discusses a user study for which an experimental adjustable autonomy enabled intelligent environment was developed. This work aims to raise awareness of the issues with using static (and extreme) levels of autonomy amongst researchers of intelligent environments and ambient intelligent environments.

[1]  Marti A. Hearst.  Trends & Controversies: Mixed-initiative interaction , 1999, IEEE Intell. Syst..

[2]  Victor Callaghan,et al.  Achieving human-agent teamwork in eHealth based pervasive intelligent environments , 2010, 2010 4th International Conference on Pervasive Computing Technologies for Healthcare.

[3]  Hani Hagras,et al.  Programming iSpaces — A Tale of Two Paradigms , 2006 .

[4]  R. A. Brooks,et al.  Intelligence without Representation , 1991, Artif. Intell..

[5]  Maarten Sierhuis,et al.  Adjustable Autonomy and Human-Agent Teamwork in Practice: An Interim Report on Space Applications , 2003 .

[6]  Tom Rodden,et al.  "Playing with the Bits" User-Configuration of Ubiquitous Domestic Environments , 2003, UbiComp.

[7]  Victor Callaghan,et al.  Perceptions of Autonomy: A Survey of User Opinions towards Autonomy in Intelligent Environments , 2011, 2011 Seventh International Conference on Intelligent Environments.

[8]  Zosia Brown,et al.  Reconciling human and automated intelligence in the provision of occupant comfort , 2009 .

[9]  O. Gandy.  The Surveillance Society: Information Technology and Bureaucratic Social Control , 1989 .

[10]  Brett Browning,et al.  Sliding Autonomy for Peer-To-Peer Human-Robot Teams , 2008 .

[11]  Graham Clarke,et al.  Some socio-technical aspects of intelligent buildings and pervasive computing research , 2009 .

[12]  D. Burnham.  The rise of the computer state , 1983 .

[13]  Manuel A. Pérez-Quiñones,et al.  The Staging Transformation Approach to Mixing Initiative , 2003, IJCAI 2003.

[14]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Experiments in adjustable autonomy , 2001, 2001 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics. e-Systems and e-Man for Cybernetics in Cyberspace (Cat.No.01CH37236).

[15]  Anind K. Dey,et al.  Is Context-Aware Computing Taking Control away from the User? Three Levels of Interactivity Examined , 2003, UbiComp.

[16]  D. Lyon.  Surveillance after September 11 , 2001 .

[17]  A. Weale.  The Essential Guide to Doing Research , 2005 .

[18]  Michael C. Mozer,et al.  Lessons from an Adaptive Home , 2005 .

[19]  Norbert A. Streitz,et al.  User requirements for intelligent home environments: a scenario-driven approach and empirical cross-cultural study , 2005, sOc-EUSAI '05.

[20]  Pattie Maes,et al.  Agents that reduce work and information overload , 1994, CACM.

[21]  Henry Lieberman,et al.  Compelling intelligent user interfaces—how much AI? , 1997, IUI '97.

[22]  Jeremy Bentham,et al.  The Panopticon Writings , 1995 .

[23]  Mari Zakrzewski,et al.  Probing a Proactive Home : Challenges in Researching and Designing Everyday Smart Environments , 2006 .

[24]  Graham Clarke,et al.  An End User Tool for Customising Personal Spaces in Ubiquitous Computing Environments , 2006, UIC.

[25]  M. Skubic,et al.  Senior residents’ perceived need of and preferences for “smart home” sensor technologies , 2008, International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care.

[26]  M. Weiser,et al.  Hot topics-ubiquitous computing , 1993 .

[27]  Jeffrey M. Bradshaw,et al.  Dimensions of Adjustable Autonomy and Mixed-Initiative Interaction , 2003, Agents and Computational Autonomy.

[28]  Jae Hyun Park,et al.  A user-centered approach to designing home network interfaces , 2003, CHI Extended Abstracts.

[29]  Mari Zakrzewski,et al.  Morphome: a constructive field study of proactive information technology in the home , 2006, DIS '06.

[30]  Krzysztof Z. Gajos,et al.  End User Empowerment in Human Centered Pervasive Computing , 2002 .

[31]  Hani Hagras,et al.  Creating an ambient-intelligence environment using embedded agents , 2004, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[32]  H. Hagras,et al.  Chapter 2 Incremental Synchronous Learning for Embedded Agents Operating in Ubiquitous Computing Environments , 2002 .

[33]  B. Schneirdeman,et al.  Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective Human-Computer Interaction , 1998 .

[34]  David G. Novick,et al.  What is Mixed-Initiative Interaction? , 1997 .

[35]  Sanjiv Singh,et al.  Preliminary Results in Sliding Autonomy for Coordinated Teams , 2004 .

[36]  Priscilla M. Regan.  Legislating Privacy: Technology, Social Values, and Public Policy , 1995, The Handbook of Privacy Studies.

[37]  Elizabeth Papadopoulou,et al.  Giving the user explicit control over implicit personalisation , 2009 .

[38]  Donald D. Dudenhoeffer,et al.  Dynamic-Autonomy for Urban Search and Rescue , 2002, AAAI Mobile Robot Competition.