Tutor Spotter: Proposing a Feature Set and Evaluating It in a Robotic System

From learning by observation, robotic research has moved towards investigations of learning by interaction. This research is inspired by findings from developmental studies on human children and primates pointing to the fact that learning takes place in a social environment. Recently, driven by the idea that learning through observation or imitation is limited because the observed action not always reveals its meaning, scaffolding or bootstrapping processes supporting learning received increased attention. However, in order to take advantage of teaching strategies, a system needs to be sensitive to a tutor as children are. We therefore developed a module allowing for spotting the tutor by monitoring her or his gaze and detecting modifications in object presentation in form of a looming action. In this article, we will present the current state of the development of our contingency detection system as a set of features.

[1]  Katharina J. Rohlfing,et al.  Developing feedback: How children of different age contribute to a tutoring interaction with adults , 2010, 2010 IEEE 9th International Conference on Development and Learning.

[2]  Hideaki Kuzuoka,et al.  Precision timing in human-robot interaction: coordination of head movement and utterance , 2008, CHI.

[3]  Herbert H. Clark,et al.  Grounding in communication , 1991, Perspectives on socially shared cognition.

[4]  K. Rohlfing,et al.  On the loop of action modification and the recipient's gaze in adult-child interaction , 2009 .

[5]  O. Pascalis,et al.  The Origins of Face Processing in Humans: Phylogeny and Ontogeny , 2009, Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science.

[6]  Masaki Ogino,et al.  Cognitive Developmental Robotics: A Survey , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Autonomous Mental Development.

[7]  J.R. Movellan,et al.  An Infomax Controller for Real Time Detection of Social Contingency , 2005, Proceedings. The 4nd International Conference on Development and Learning, 2005..

[8]  E. Schegloff.  Sequence Organization in Interaction: Contents , 2007 .

[9]  Karola Pitsch,et al.  How infants perceive the toy robot Pleo. An exploratory case study on infant-robot-interaction , 2010, HRI 2010.

[10]  Andrea Lockerd Thomaz,et al.  Vision-based contingency detection , 2011, 2011 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[11]  Thomas A. Kindermann,et al.  Natural Peer Groups as Contexts for Individual Development: The Case of Children's Motivation in School. , 1993 .

[12]  D. Muir,et al.  The Still-Face Effect: Methodological Issues and New Applications , 2003 .

[13]  Giorgio Metta,et al.  YARP: Yet Another Robot Platform , 2006 .

[14]  Michael A. Arbib,et al.  Affordances, effectivities, and assisted imitation: Caregivers and the directing of attention , 2007, Neurocomputing.

[15]  G. Csibra,et al.  Social learning and social cognition: The case for pedagogy , 2006 .

[16]  Darren Gergle,et al.  Emotion rating from short blog texts , 2008, CHI.

[17]  E. Clark,et al.  Getting and maintaining attention in talk to young children* , 2007, Journal of Child Language.

[18]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition , 2005, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[19]  M. Legerstee,et al.  Contingency, imitation, and affect sharing: Foundations of infants' social awareness. , 2006, Developmental psychology.

[20]  Katharina J. Rohlfing,et al.  Towards Learning by Interacting , 2009, Creating Brain-Like Intelligence.

[21]  J. Bavelas,et al.  Listener Responses as a Collaborative Process: The Role of Gaze , 2002 .

[22]  D. Regan,et al.  Looming detectors in the human visual pathway , 1978, Vision Research.

[23]  Andrew W. Fitzgibbon,et al.  Real-time human pose recognition in parts from single depth images , 2011, CVPR 2011.

[24]  M. Tomasello,et al.  Joint attention and early language. , 1986, Child development.

[25]  G. Csibra,et al.  Gaze Following in Human Infants Depends on Communicative Signals , 2008, Current Biology.

[26]  M. Asada,et al.  Development of joint attention related actions based on reproducing interaction contingency , 2008, 2008 7th IEEE International Conference on Development and Learning.

[27]  Mark H. Johnson,et al.  Processes of change in brain and cognitive development , 2005, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[28]  Daniel Stahl,et al.  Sensitivity to social contingencies between 1 and 3 months of age. , 2005, Developmental science.

[29]  S. Birch,et al.  The effects of contingency in previous interactions on infants’ preference for social partners , 1999 .

[30]  Chrystopher L. Nehaniv,et al.  Like Me?- Measures of Correspondence and Imitation , 2001, Cybern. Syst..

[31]  Hennie Brugman,et al.  Annotating Multi-media/Multi-modal Resources with ELAN , 2004, LREC.

[32]  Minoru Asada,et al.  Reproducing Interaction Contingency Toward Open-Ended Development of Social Actions: Case Study on Joint Attention , 2010, IEEE Transactions on Autonomous Mental Development.

[33]  N. Fox,et al.  Social perception in infants , 1985 .

[34]  T. Brazelton,et al.  The Structure of Face-to-Face Interaction and its Developmental Functions , 2013 .

[35]  Gergely Csibra,et al.  Recognizing Communicative Intentions in Infancy , 2010 .

[36]  Fumihide Tanaka,et al.  Socialization between toddlers and robots at an early childhood education center , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[37]  Shoji Itakura,et al.  Development of contingency: How infants become sensitive to contingency? , 2006 .

[38]  K. Rohlfing,et al.  Improving HRI design by applying Systemic Interaction Analysis (SInA) , 2009 .

[39]  L. Gogate,et al.  A study of multimodal motherese: the role of temporal synchrony between verbal labels and gestures. , 2000, Child development.

[40]  O. Pascalis,et al.  The Shaping of the Face Space in Early Infancy: Becoming a Native Face Processor. , 2010, Child development perspectives.

[41]  Anna-Lisa Vollmer,et al.  Does embodiment affect tutoring behavior , 2010 .

[42]  Giulio Sandini,et al.  In Press, Ieee Transactions on Autonomous Mental Development , 2010 .

[43]  K. Kaye.  The mental and social life of babies : how parents create persons , 1982 .

[44]  Christian Bauckhage,et al.  An active memory as a model for information fusion , 2004 .

[45]  M. Legerstee.  Infants' Sense of People: Precursors to a Theory of Mind , 2005 .

[46]  Lakshmi J. Gogate,et al.  Type of Maternal Object Motion During Synchronous Naming Predicts Preverbal Infants' Learning of Word-Object Relations. , 2008, Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies.

[47]  Bernhard Sendhoff,et al.  Creating Brain-Like Intelligence: From Basic Principles to Complex Intelligent Systems , 2009, Creating Brain-Like Intelligence.

[48]  Heidi Keller,et al.  Temporal Contingency as an Independent Component of Parenting Behavior , 1999 .

[49]  Dare A. Baldwin,et al.  Evidence for ‘motionese’: modifications in mothers’ infant-directed action , 2002 .

[50]  D. Maurer,et al.  Face Perception During Early Infancy , 1999 .

[51]  J. Watson,et al.  Early socio–emotional development: Contingency perception and the social-biofeedback model. , 1999 .

[52]  Kerstin Fischer,et al.  Interpersonal variation in understanding robots as social actors , 2011, 2011 6th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[53]  Katharina J. Rohlfing,et al.  How can multimodal cues from child-directed interaction reduce learning complexity in robots? , 2006, Adv. Robotics.

[54]  J. Watson,et al.  The social biofeedback theory of parental affect-mirroring: the development of emotional self-awareness and self-control in infancy. , 1996, The International journal of psycho-analysis.

[55]  Helge J. Ritter.  Cognitive Interaction Technology , 2010, KI - Künstliche Intelligenz.