The Purpose of HART (Hedonism, Autonomy, Responsibility, Trust) Niranjan Suri Maria Gini, Seyed Waqar Jaffry, Niranjan Suri, Janneke van der Zwaan, Arnoud Visser

Long list issues (purpose related)  Killer applications (different team sizes)  What is teamwork?  Role of communication in teamwork (reduction inside good team)  Role of training inside team  How to communicate H->R, R->H, R->R.  Role of none-robot agents inside teams  Multiple representation (both HAR) in same role  How can RA be aware of the human and his feelings?  Metrics; teams, performance, meta-information about the experiments, quantitative and qualitative methodologies  Emotions for the robots to support the group interactions  Transparency / deceiving  Lifetime of a team (team formation / role taking / specialization / breaking up)  Training is partly done by the environment / partly from the team-members  Do robots still need a identity for scale > 100  Explore / control / autonomy -> gradual responsibility

Short list issues (purpose related)  Metrics; teams, performance, meta-information about the experiments, quantitative and qualitative methodologies 1, 2  How can RA be aware of the human and his feelings? 2, 2  Lifetime of a team (team formation / role taking / specialization / breaking up) 1, 3  Killer applications (different team sizes) 2, 3  How to communicate H->R, R->H, R->R. 1  Do robots still need a identity for scale >  Multiple representation (both HAR) in same role 3  Emotions for the robots to support the group interactions 3

Short list issues (purpose related)  Metrics; teams, performance, meta-information about the experiments, quantitative and qualitative methodologies 1, 2  How can RA be aware of the human and his feelings? 2, 2  Lifetime of a team (team formation / role taking / specialization / breaking up) 1, 3  Killer applications (different team sizes) -> Milestones  How to communicate H->R, R->H, R->R. 1  Do robots still need a identity for scale >  Multiple representation (both HAR) in same role 3  Emotions for the robots to support the group interactions 3

Milestone 1&2 (killer applications)  Example of team of 10 (2 drivers / 8 robots)  Convoy of trucks with two humans: easier on the highway than behind the warfront  Traffic lights should be intelligent before the convoy is allowed on highway  The army application should be operational in 2016  Ethics / laws will be the main issue to get this scenario operational before 2020 at the highways

Milestone 3 (killer applications)  Example of team of 2 (1 nurse / 1 robot)  Lifting assistance for a nurse  Alternatives:  Making the bed more intelligent (too restrictive)  Get the lifting capability in the environment (a lot of unfriendly infrastructure)  Exoskelet for the nurse (unfriendly for the other tasks of the nurse) Lifting robot is most flexible and friendly solution  The challenge of lifting is still at the mechanical department. Should we already work on the teamwork?  The robot should automatically follow the nurse and keep out of the nurse’s way  The robot should know when to follow and when to stay (judging the intentions)  Milestone at 2020

Milestone 4 (killer applications)  Example of team of 5 (2 operators / 1 human explorer / 1 ground robot / 1 air robot)  Urban Search and Rescue  Milestone January 2011

Trust  Hard to gain, easy to lose  How do robots gain and maintain human trust  Do robots need to trust humans?  Predictability of system is key to trust  Prescriptive notion – if the system is performing as specified by the objective, then it can be trusted  Another indicator – “normal” communication between team members  Effective conveyance of performance and limitations to humans  How does the human recognize and convey to the robot detrimental environmental conditions  Analogy to Coaching – need to understand the limits, why something is going wrong, and convey options / direction to the robots  Dynamics of Human Trust – key role in team building  Teaming is something that is perceived by humans, not the robots  Robots must adapt their behavior based on their perception of the human trust model  Robots must be able to interpret indirect human expression / communication

Autonomy and Responsibility  “A Robot without a battery is a very autonomous robot” – Visser  “A Robot that can say no is a very autonomous robot” - Gini  Meta question – what qualifies as a robot? Is Autonomy Required?  Bulldozer?, Robonaut? Jackhammer? Car?  Behavior-based Robotics – two goals:  Invariants that should not be violated (do not run into walls, kill anyone, including self, etc.)  Attainable goals – related to task or objective  How does teaching (e.g., by demonstration) / learning fit into this?  How does learning for a robot differ from learning for humans?  Awareness of the human team member(s) is paramount  To what extent, if at all, do we need to anthropomorphize robots? Not just from a physical perspective, but from the notions of trust, behavior, etc.  Responsibility – four types?  Responsibility for the given / assigned / delegated tasks  Responsibility to communicate with team members for shared SA  Responsibility to the other team members / task (e.g., help other team members)  Responsibility for the greater good (e.g., not polluting the environment, etc.)

Applications  Search and Rescue  UAV – Mountain Search (Brown University)  RoboCup City-Level Search and Rescue for Disaster Recovery  Persistent Surveillance  Fixed and mobile assets  Cooperative Medicine  Nurse’s aid  Operating room  Rehabilitation  Assistants for Elderly Citizens  Warfighting  Useful to categorize applications into good targets for teams of size 2, 5, and 10 members  Nurse’s aid, Elderly Citizen Assistants (2)  Mountain Search and Rescue, Persistent Surveillance (5)  Warfighting (10)

Metrics  What are appropriate metrics to measure success of teamwork?  We don’t want a Turing Test, but some test  One Approach is to show that Human + Robot can do more than Human + Human or Robot + Robot  Scalability with respect to numbers  What are the best domains to show HART?  Meta metric – how “much” teamwork is there in a solution?  Metric – how well is the solution working?  Is there a notion of a local (i.e., individual) objective or metric versus a global (i.e., systemwide) objective or metric?  How does robustness play into this? Should robustness be an independent metric?  “Types” of robustness – flexibility to deal with novel/different situations (opposite of brittleness)  Role substitution – humanoid robots substituting for humans  Fit – how well do robots fit in an environment constructed by and for humans

Questions  What is essential for teamwork?  Human-level communication (gestures, facial expressions)?