Human behavioural responses to robot head gaze during robot-to-human handovers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A robot that can fluently hand over objects to people can be useful in many applications. In an effort to develop a fluent robot-to-human handover system, this work investigates people's behavioural responses to a robot that hands over objects to them while using different types of gaze cues. In our previous work, we found empirical evidence that the use of a robot's head gaze can affect a person's timing of reaching towards the offered object. In this paper, we investigate this effect further by exploring the manner in which human's reaching and gaze behaviours are affected by a robot's head gaze. We conducted a video-based investigation of 97 naïve participants' behavioural responses to robot-to-human handovers. Through a frame-by-frame analysis, we recorded a detailed timeline of the robot's and human's gaze and reaching behaviours. Results confirm the finding from our previous study that the robot's head gaze can significantly impact the timing of human receiver's reaching behaviour during handovers. In addition, our results demonstrate that the robot's head gaze affects human's gaze behaviour during handovers, and this effect explains some unexpected findings in our previous work.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".