Posts Tagged ‘human-robot interactions’

December 1st, 2011

Teaching motion primitives - article


Incremental kinesthetic teaching of motion primitives using the motion refinement tube
Dongheui Lee, Christian Ott

Finding ways to easily teach service robots new motions will be key to their integration in our everyday environments. Ideally, teaching a robot should be no different than teaching a human.

For example, to teach someone a new dance, you might first show them the basic steps. You will most likely mention motion primitives, such as “right foot forward” and not the actual position of all your body joints. The apprentice dancer will then try to imitate your steps. To refine dance moves, the teacher can physically correct the motion by pushing the elbow higher, straightening the back or guiding the steps. However, if the student has been taught to move forward with its right foot, and the teacher pushes in the opposite direction, the dancer will most likely freeze. This is due to the fact that refinements should fit within a certain region around the movement that the person expects (refinement tube). Over time, the dancer iteratively improves its movements, forgetting older clumsy moves along the way.

Following this exact idea, Lee et al. have been teaching motion primitives to the humanoid upper-body robot “Justin”. Experiments use the 19 joints of the arms (2 times 7 DOF), torso (3 DOF), and head (2 DOF). The framework shown in the schematic below, uses imitation learning followed by iterative kinesthetic motion refinements (physically guided corrections) within a refinement tube. Motion primitives are represented as a hidden Markov Model.

The authors hope that in the future, these algorithms can contribute to making humanoid robots, which are capable of autonomous long-term learning and adaptation.

| More

Related posts

November 30th, 2011

Robotic Musicianship - article


Interactive improvisation with a robotic marimba player
Guy Hoffman, Gil Weinberg

Shimon is an interactive robotic marimba player that can improvise both music and choreography in real-time to the melody of a human pianist.

Playing an instrument does not make you a musician. To become a musician you need to listen, analyze, improvise, and interact through the sound you produce and your body language.

With this in mind, Hoffman et al. explore robotic musicianship. Unlike robots that simply perform a sequence of notes, Shimon’s performances are composed of a sequence of gestures that may or may not produce sound. Using gestures as the building blocks of musical expression is particularly appropriate for robotic musicianship, and nicely fits with our embodied view of human-robot interaction.

The robot is able to improvise by following basic aspects of standard Jazz joint improvisation and can anticipate gestures to easily synchronize with duet partners. Building on this, the human and robot could perform three types of interactions. In the first interaction, the robot and human played two distinct musical phrases, where the second phrase is a commentary on the first phrase. The second interaction was centered around the choreographic aspect of movement with the notes appearing as a “side-effect” of the performance. The third interaction was a rhythmic phrase-matching improvisation.

Using this improvisation system, the pair performed full-length performances of nearly 7 minutes in front of live public audiences and more than 70’000 online viewers.

After the live performances, additional experiments were conducted to investigate the importance of physical embodiment and visual contact in Robotic Musicianship. Results show that synchronization between the robot and musician can be aided by visual contact when the tempo is uncertain and slow. In addition, the audience perceives Shimon as playing better, more like a human, as more responsive, and even more inspired when compared to a “computer musician”. Shimon was also rated as better synchronized, more coherent, communicating, and coordinated; and the human as more inspired and more responsive.

In the future, Hoffman et al. hope to further explore robot musicianship by giving Shimon a socially expressive robot head, vision and new gestures.

| More

Related posts

August 29th, 2010

Social learning - article


Exploiting social partners in robot learning
Maya Cakmak, Nick DePalma, Rosa I. Arriaga, Andrea L. Thomaz

Robots are portrayed as tomorrows helpers, be it in schools, hospitals, workplaces or homes. Unfortunately, such robots won’t be truly useful out-of-the-box because of the complexity of real-world environments and tasks. Instead, they will need to learn how to interact with objects in their environment to produce a desired outcome (affordance learning).

For this purpose, robots can explore the world while using machine learning techniques to update their knowledge. However, the learning process is sometimes saturated with examples of objects, actions and effects that won’t help the robot in its purpose.

In these cases, humans or other social partners can help direct robot learning (social learning). Most studies have focussed on scenarios where a teacher demonstrates how to correctly do a task. The robot then imitates the teacher by reproducing the same actions to achieve the same goals.

This approach, while being very efficient, typically means that the teacher needs to take time to train the robot, which can be burdensome. Furthermore, the robot might be so specialized for the demonstrated scenario that it will have trouble performing tasks that slightly differ. In addition, imitation only works when the teacher and robot have similar motion constraints and morphologies.

Luckily, humans and animals use a large variety of mechanisms to learn from social partners. Tapping into this reservoir, Cakmak et al. propose mechanisms where:
- robots interact with the same objects as the social partner (stimulus enhancement)
- robots try to achieve the same effect on the same object as the social partner (emulation)
- robots reproduce the same action as the social partner (mimicking)

Experiments performed in simulation compare stimulus enhancement, emulation, mimicking, imitation and non-social learning in a large variety of situations. The results summarize which mechanisms are better suited for which scenarios in a series of very useful guidelines. Demonstrations with two robots, Jimmy and Jane, were done to validate the study. Don’t miss the excellent video below for a summary of the article.

In the future, Cakmak et al. will focus on combining learning approaches to harness the full potential of this rich set of mechanisms.

| More

Related posts