MATE Robots Simplifying My Work: The Benefits and Socioethical Implications

With the increasing complexity of modern industrial automatic and robotic systems, a burden is placed on system operators, who are required to supervise and interact with very complex systems, typically under difficult and stressful conditions. To overcome these challenges, it is necessary to adopt a responsible approach based on an anthropocentric design methodology so that machines adapt to human capabilities rather than vice versa. In this article, we consider an integrated methodological design approach, referred to as measure, adapt, and teach (MATE), which consists of devising complex automatic or robotic solutions that measure the current operator's status and adapting the interaction accordingly, while providing him or her with the necessary skills and expertise to improve the interaction. A MATE system, shown in Figure 1, endeavors to be usable for all users, thus meeting the principles of inclusive design. However, the use of such a MATE system calls to attention several ethical and social implications, which are discussed in this article. Additionally, a discussion about which factors in the organization of companies are critical with respect to the introduction of a MATE system is presented.

[1]  Constantine Stephanidis,et al.  Universal Access in the Information Society: Methods, Tools, and Interaction Technologies , 2001, Universal Access in the Information Society.

[2]  Gianmarco Veruggio,et al.  Roboethics: Social and Ethical Implications , 2016, Springer Handbook of Robotics, 2nd Ed..

[3]  Dennis Buede,et al.  I. Systems Engineering Fundamentals , 2002 .

[4]  John Leonard,et al.  Systems Engineering Fundamentals , 1999 .

[5]  Tobias Mettler,et al.  Service Robots , 2015, Bus. Inf. Syst. Eng..

[6]  Allison Sauppé,et al.  The Social Impact of a Robot Co-Worker in Industrial Settings , 2015, CHI.

[7]  Aaas News,et al.  Book Reviews , 1893, Buffalo Medical and Surgical Journal.

[8]  Lorenzo Sabattini,et al.  Relieving operators’ workload: Towards affective robotics in industrial scenarios , 2018, Mechatronics.

[9]  Julio Abascal,et al.  Moving towards inclusive design guidelines for socially and ethically aware HCI , 2005, Interact. Comput..

[10]  Kevin Barraclough,et al.  I and i , 2001, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[11]  Bram Vanderborght,et al.  Attitudes of Factory Workers towards Industrial and Collaborative Robots , 2017, HRI.

[12]  Pavol Tanuska,et al.  Toward Nonconventional Human–Machine Interfaces for Supervisory Plant Process Monitoring , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[13]  Aimee van Wynsberghe,et al.  Service robots, care ethics, and design , 2016, Ethics and Information Technology.

[14]  G. G. Stokes "J." , 1890, The New Yale Book of Quotations.

[15]  James L. Alty,et al.  Adaptive user interface for process control based on multi-agent approach , 2000, AVI '00.

[16]  Lorenzo Sabattini,et al.  Towards modern inclusive factories: A methodology for the development of smart adaptive human-machine interfaces , 2017, 2017 22nd IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA).

[17]  Lorenzo Sabattini,et al.  Methodological approach for the design of a complex inclusive human-machine system , 2017, 2017 13th IEEE Conference on Automation Science and Engineering (CASE).

[18]  D. Norman The Design of Everyday Things: Revised and Expanded Edition , 2013 .

[19]  E. Vesterinen,et al.  Affective Computing , 2009, Encyclopedia of Biometrics.

[20]  Friedhelm Nachreiner,et al.  Human factors in process control systems: The design of human–machine interfaces ☆ , 2006 .