Human perception of intrinsically motivated autonomy in human-robot interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A challenge in using robots in human-inhabited environments is to design behavior that is engaging, yet robust to the perturbations induced by human interaction. Our idea is to imbue the robot with intrinsic motivation (IM) so that it can handle new situations and appears as a genuine social other to humans and thus be of more interest to a human interaction partner. Human-robot interaction (HRI) experiments mainly focus on scripted or teleoperated robots, that mimic characteristics such as IM to control isolated behavior factors. This article presents a “robotologist” study design that allows comparing autonomously generated behaviors with each other and, for the first time, evaluates the human perception of IM-based generated behavior in robots. We conducted a within-subjects user study ( N = 24) where participants interacted with a fully autonomous Sphero BB8 robot with different behavioral regimes: one realizing an adaptive, intrinsically motivated behavior and the other being reactive, but not adaptive. The robot and its behaviors are intentionally kept minimal to concentrate on the effect induced by IM. A quantitative analysis of post-interaction questionnaires showed a significantly higher perception of the dimension “Warmth” compared to the reactive baseline behavior. Warmth is considered a primary dimension for social attitude formation in human social cognition. A human perceived as warm (friendly, trustworthy) experiences more positive social interactions.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".