Hoffman, G. (2011). On stage: robots as performers. RSS 2011 Workshop on Human-Robot Interaction: ….
Notes:
p.2: relatively constrained, — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.2: humans are sensitive not only to the content, symbols, and categories of interaction tokens, but also to their timing. In human-human joint activities, subjects care about when verbal and non-verbal events occur — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.2: we have shown that not only discrete post-action delays, but also anticipatory action relative to human activity at sub-action resolution causes subjects to evaluate virtual characters and robots as more fluent, morecommitted, and more contributing to the team, when compared to robots that were purely reactive, and thus trailing the subjects’ behavior — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.2: Still, most current HRI models are structured in discrete-action turn-taking frameworks, based on dialog, planning, and state-action models. This results in a rigid stop-and-go interaction, which is often neither efficient nor fluent, butinstead imposes unnatural structure on human participants. Research in action fluency, sub-action coordination, and timing could therefore prove valuable for the acceptance of robots by untrained humans. — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.2: stage performance robots as a framework to develop and evaluate methods for temporally coordinated human-robot activities. — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.3: Human acting method and theory holds valuable insights into some of the questions researchers in HRI are also tackling. An actor’s preparation of a role includes a systematic investigation of what gesture, body pose or physical action best describes the internal drive and objective of their character in different contexts. Good actors pay attention to conventions of nonverbal communication and often need to take on the difficult task of portraying complex trajectories without words. Much of the repetitive practice actors engage in is aimed to perfect the timing and coordination between a number of agents acting together. These challenges bear similarity to those one faces when designing behaviors for human-robot interaction. — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.3: Continuity — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.4: The actor’s inner monologue must carry on the whole time the actor is on stage, whether they say something or not. This inner monologue should usually be laid out in detail while preparing for a role, and lends the actor credibility of an internal process while they’re on stage, leading up to the lines and thus preventing the lines to be uttered in a void. — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.4: the focus of a scene is not happening within any of the actor’s minds, or even behaviors, but in the space between the two actors — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.4: “inner monologue” — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.4: help avoid the command-and-response behavior robots usually display, and lead to more fluency and acceptance in human-robot joint activities — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.4: emotional motor activity, — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.4: emphasis is usually put on the speed, immediacy, and timeliness of the response, rather than merely on the mutual structure of the exchange. In these interactions, synchronizing one actor’s actions with the other’s, while maintaining mutual responsiveness, is key. — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017
p.4: Responsiveness — Highlighted Feb 5, 2017