Assessing the social criteria for human-robot collaborative navigation: A comparison of human-aware navigation planners

Harmish Khambhaita, R. Alami
{"title":"Assessing the social criteria for human-robot collaborative navigation: A comparison of human-aware navigation planners","authors":"Harmish Khambhaita, R. Alami","doi":"10.1109/ROMAN.2017.8172447","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on requirements for effective human robot collaboration in interactive navigation scenarios. We designed several use-cases where humans and robot had to move in the same environment that resemble canonical path-crossing situations. These use-cases include open as well as constrained spaces. Three different state-of-the-art humanaware navigation planners were used for planning the robot paths during all selected use-cases. We compare results of simulation experiments with these human-aware planners in terms of quality of generated trajectories together with discussion on capabilities and limitations of the planners. The results show that the human-robot collaborative planner [1] performs better in everyday path-crossing configurations. This suggests that the criteria used by the human-robot collaborative planner (safety, time-to-collision, directional-costs) are possible good measures for designing acceptable human-aware navigation planners. Consequently, we analyze the effects of these social criteria and draw perspectives on future evolution of human-aware navigation planning methods.","PeriodicalId":134777,"journal":{"name":"2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)","volume":"111 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-08-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"25","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2017 26th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2017.8172447","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 25

Abstract

This paper focuses on requirements for effective human robot collaboration in interactive navigation scenarios. We designed several use-cases where humans and robot had to move in the same environment that resemble canonical path-crossing situations. These use-cases include open as well as constrained spaces. Three different state-of-the-art humanaware navigation planners were used for planning the robot paths during all selected use-cases. We compare results of simulation experiments with these human-aware planners in terms of quality of generated trajectories together with discussion on capabilities and limitations of the planners. The results show that the human-robot collaborative planner [1] performs better in everyday path-crossing configurations. This suggests that the criteria used by the human-robot collaborative planner (safety, time-to-collision, directional-costs) are possible good measures for designing acceptable human-aware navigation planners. Consequently, we analyze the effects of these social criteria and draw perspectives on future evolution of human-aware navigation planning methods.
评估人机协同导航的社会标准:人类感知导航计划者的比较
本文主要研究交互导航场景下人机有效协作的需求。我们设计了几个用例,其中人类和机器人必须在相同的环境中移动,类似于典型的交叉路径情况。这些用例包括开放的和受限的空间。在所有选定的用例中,使用了三种不同的最先进的人类感知导航规划器来规划机器人路径。我们将模拟实验的结果与这些人类意识规划器在生成轨迹的质量方面进行比较,并讨论了规划器的能力和局限性。结果表明,人-机器人协同规划器[1]在日常路径交叉配置中表现较好。这表明,人机协作规划器使用的标准(安全性、碰撞时间、方向成本)可能是设计可接受的人类感知导航规划器的好方法。因此,我们分析了这些社会标准的影响,并对人类感知导航规划方法的未来发展提出了展望。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信