Towards Computational Proxemics: Inferring Social Relations from Interpersonal Distances

This paper proposes a study corroborated by preliminary experiments on the inference of social relations based on the analysis of interpersonal distances, measured with on obtrusive computer vision techniques. The experiments have been performed over 13 individuals involved in casual standing conversations and the results show that people tend to get closer when their relation is more intimate. In other words, social and physical distances tend to match one another. In this respect, the results match the findings of proxemics, the discipline studying the social and affective meaning of space use and organization in social gatherings. The match between results and expectations of proxemics is observed also when changing one of the most important contextual factors in this type of scenarios, namely the amount of space available to the interactants.

[1]  O. Watson,et al.  Proxemic behavior : a cross-cultural study , 1970 .

[2]  R. Veitch,et al.  Hot and crowded: influences of population density and temperature on interpersonal affective behavior. , 1971, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[3]  H. W. Smith Territorial Spacing on a Beach Revisited: A Cross-National Exploration , 1981 .

[4]  Alessio Del Bue,et al.  Social interaction discovery by statistical analysis of F-formations , 2011, BMVC.

[5]  Marek P. Michalowski,et al.  A spatial model of engagement for a social robot , 2006, 9th IEEE International Workshop on Advanced Motion Control, 2006..

[6]  M. Knapp,et al.  Nonverbal communication in human interaction , 1972 .

[7]  Vittorio Murino,et al.  Interaction detection by statistical analysis of proxemics cues in videos , 2011 .

[8]  Leila Takayama,et al.  Influences on proxemic behaviors in human-robot interaction , 2009, 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[9]  Michael J. White Interpersonal Distance as Affected by Room Size, Status, and Sex , 1975 .

[10]  Yasushi Nakauchi,et al.  A Social Robot that Stands in Line , 2000, Proceedings. 2000 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2000) (Cat. No.00CH37113).

[11]  Daniel Gatica-Perez,et al.  Automatic nonverbal analysis of social interaction in small groups: A review , 2009, Image Vis. Comput..

[12]  R. Sommer,et al.  Seating arrangements and status. , 1967, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[13]  Henrik I. Christensen,et al.  Human-robot embodied interaction in hallway settings: a pilot user study , 2005, ROMAN 2005. IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2005..

[14]  Vittorio Murino,et al.  Socially intelligent surveillance and monitoring: Analysing social dimensions of physical space , 2010, 2010 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition - Workshops.

[15]  C. Cochran,et al.  The Effect of Availability of Vertical Space on Personal Space , 1982 .

[16]  Neil J. Gordon,et al.  A tutorial on particle filters for online nonlinear/non-Gaussian Bayesian tracking , 2002, IEEE Trans. Signal Process..

[17]  E. Hall,et al.  The Hidden Dimension , 1970 .

[18]  A. Kendon Conducting Interaction: Patterns of Behavior in Focused Encounters , 1990 .

[19]  Donald B. Rubin,et al.  Max-imum Likelihood from Incomplete Data , 1972 .

[20]  Cynthia Breazeal,et al.  Designing sociable robots , 2002 .

[21]  Georg Groh,et al.  Detecting Social Situations from Interaction Geometry , 2010, 2010 IEEE Second International Conference on Social Computing.

[22]  Robert Gifford,et al.  Nonverbal intimacy: Clarifying the role of seating distance and orientation , 1986 .

[23]  Helbing,et al.  Social force model for pedestrian dynamics. , 1995, Physical review. E, Statistical physics, plasmas, fluids, and related interdisciplinary topics.

[24]  C. Cochran,et al.  Personal Space Requirements in Indoor Versus Outdoor Locations , 1984 .

[25]  David G. Stork,et al.  Pattern Classification , 1973 .

[26]  Luc Van Gool,et al.  You'll never walk alone: Modeling social behavior for multi-target tracking , 2009, 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision.

[27]  Allan Mazur,et al.  On Wilson's Sociobiology , 1976, American Journal of Sociology.

[28]  W. Eric L. Grimson,et al.  Adaptive background mixture models for real-time tracking , 1999, Proceedings. 1999 IEEE Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (Cat. No PR00149).

[29]  Maja Pantic,et al.  Social signal processing: Survey of an emerging domain , 2009, Image Vis. Comput..

[30]  Elisa Ricci,et al.  Space speaks: towards socially and personality aware visual surveillance , 2010, MPVA '10.

[31]  Kerstin Dautenhahn,et al.  Living with Robots: Investigating the Habituation Effect in Participants' Preferences During a Longitudinal Human-Robot Interaction Study , 2007, RO-MAN 2007 - The 16th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication.

[32]  Marshall F. Tappen,et al.  Learning pedestrian dynamics from the real world , 2009, 2009 IEEE 12th International Conference on Computer Vision.

[33]  Anil K. Jain,et al.  Unsupervised Learning of Finite Mixture Models , 2002, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[34]  S. Heshka,et al.  Interpersonal Speaking Distance as a Function of Age, Sex, and Relationship , 1972 .

[35]  Leslie Adams,et al.  The Effect of Lighting Conditions on Personal Space Requirements , 1991 .

[36]  J. Baxter Interpersonal spacing in natural settings. , 1970, Sociometry.

[37]  D. Rubin,et al.  Maximum likelihood from incomplete data via the EM - algorithm plus discussions on the paper , 1977 .