Human Responses to Stimuli Produced by Robot Swarms - the Effect of the Reality-Gap on Psychological State

We study the reality-gap effect (the effect of the inherent discrepancy between simulation and reality) on the human psychophysiological state, workload and reaction time in the context of a human-swarm interaction scenario. In our experiments, 37 participants perform a supervision task (i.e., the participants have to respond to visual stimuli produced by a robot swarm) with a real robot swarm and with simulated robot swarms. Our results show that the reality-gap significantly affects the human psychophysiological state, workload and reaction time.

[1]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Effect of a robot on user perceptions , 2004, 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37566).

[2]  Katia P. Sycara,et al.  Neglect Benevolence in Human-Swarm Interaction with Communication Latency , 2012, SEMCCO.

[3]  Marco Dorigo,et al.  Investigating the effect of the reality gap on the human psychophysiological state in the context of human-swarm interaction , 2016, PeerJ Comput. Sci..

[4]  Maja J. Mataric,et al.  Embodiment and Human-Robot Interaction: A Task-Based Perspective , 2007, RO-MAN 2007 - The 16th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[5]  Ana Paiva,et al.  Are emotional robots more fun to play with? , 2008, RO-MAN 2008 - The 17th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[6]  Marco Dorigo,et al.  Investigating the effect of increasing robot group sizes on the human psychophysiological state in the context of human–swarm interaction , 2016, Swarm Intelligence.

[7]  S. Hart,et al.  Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of Empirical and Theoretical Research , 1988 .

[8]  Juan Fasola,et al.  A socially assistive robot exercise coach for the elderly , 2013, J. Hum. Robot Interact..

[9]  Brigitte Le Pévédic,et al.  Effect of agent embodiment on the elder user enjoyment of a game , 2013, ACHI 2013.

[10]  Katia P. Sycara,et al.  Explicit vs. Tacit leadership in influencing the behavior of swarms , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[11]  Katia P. Sycara,et al.  Connectivity Differences between Human Operators of Swarms and Bandwidth Limitations , 2012, SEMCCO.

[12]  Katia P. Sycara,et al.  Bounds of Neglect Benevolence in Input Timing for Human Interaction with Robotic Swarms , 2015, 2015 10th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[13]  Katia P. Sycara,et al.  Human Interaction With Robot Swarms: A Survey , 2016, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[14]  Peta Wyeth,et al.  GameFlow: a model for evaluating player enjoyment in games , 2005, CIE.

[15]  Susan R. Fussell,et al.  Comparing a computer agent with a humanoid robot , 2007, 2007 2nd ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[16]  Ana Paiva,et al.  iCat, the chess player: the influence of embodiment in the enjoyment of a game , 2008, AAMAS.

[17]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Scalable Human Interaction with Robotic Swarms , 2013 .

[18]  Katia Sycara,et al.  Human-swarm interaction , 2013, HRI 2013.

[19]  Magnus Egerstedt,et al.  Controllability Characterizations of Leader-Based Swarm Interactions , 2012, AAAI Fall Symposium: Human Control of Bioinspired Swarms.

[20]  Francesco Mondada,et al.  The e-puck, a Robot Designed for Education in Engineering , 2009 .

[21]  P. Lang.  Behavioral treatment and bio-behavioral assessment: computer applications , 1980 .

[22]  Katia P. Sycara,et al.  Human Control of Leader-Based Swarms , 2013, 2013 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics.

[23]  Magnus Egerstedt,et al.  Haptic interactions with multi-robot swarms using manipulability , 2015, HRI 2015.