MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965858123 · doi:10.1115/detc2011-48031

A Socially Assistive Robot That Can Interpret Body Language

2011· article· en· W1965858123 on OpenAlexaff
Derek McColl, Goldie Nejat

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotHuman–computer interactionCategorizationComputer scienceHuman–robot interactionIdentification (biology)CognitionTask (project management)Social robotArtificial intelligencePsychologyMobile robotRobot controlEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Socially assistive robots can engage in assistive human-robot interactions (HRI) by providing rehabilitation of cognitive, social, and physical abilities after a stroke, accident or diagnosis of a social, developmental or cognitive disorder. However, there are a number of research issues that need to be addressed in order to design such robots. In this paper, we address one main challenge in the development of intelligent socially assistive robots: A robot’s ability to identify human non-verbal communication during assistive interactions. In this paper, we present a unique non-contact automated sensory-based approach for identification and categorization of human upper body language in determining how accessible a person is to a robot during natural real-time HRI. This classification will allow a robot to effectively determine its own reactive task-driven behavior during assistive interactions. The types of interactions envisioned include providing reminders, health monitoring, and social and cognitive therapies. Preliminary experiments show the potential of integrating the proposed body language recognition and classification technique into socially assistive robotic systems partaking in HRI scenarios.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.913
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0600.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.294 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Robot Interaction and HRIFrench-language works237,207