Interaction between human and robot

Interaction between human and robot 

Author: Jun-Ming Lu, Tzung-Cheng Tsai, Yeh-Liang Hsu (2010-10-05); recommended: 

Yeh-Liang Hsu (2010-10-05). 

Note: This paper is a chapter in the book “Talking about interaction”, to be published. 

Abstract 


With the rapid advancement of robotics, robots have become smarter and thus develop 

a closer relationship with humans over time. To accommodate this strong growth, the 

interaction between human and robot plays a major role in the modern applications of 

robotics. This multidisciplinary field of research, namely human-robot interaction (HRI), 

requires contributions from a variety of research fields such as robotics, human-computer 

interaction, and artificial intelligence. This chapter will first define the two main categories 

of robots, namely industrial and service robots, and their applications. Subsequently, the 

general HRI issues will be discussed to explain how they affect the use of robots. Finally, 

key design elements for good HRI are summarized to reveal the enabling technologies and 

future trends in the development of HRI. 

Keywords: Robot; robotics; human-robot interaction (HRI); telepresence 

1. Robots and robotics 

Prior to the use of the term “robot,” human beings have been dreamed about 

human-like creations that can assist in performing tasks for a long time. For example, in 

1495, Leonardo Da Vinci designed a humanoid automaton that is intended to make several 

human-like motions (Figure 1). However, due to the technological limitations, most of 

these studies remain in conceptual stages. In the 18th century, miniature automatons come 

out as toys for entertainment. With the programmed musical box embedded in a doll, the 

melody starts to play as if the doll plays the instrument by itself. In 1920, the term “robot” 

was first introduced by Čapek in his play entitled “Rossum's Universal Robots.” Based on 

1 

http://grc.yzu.edu.tw/


his idea, robots are the artificial people created to work as servants. In the beginning, the 

robots are happy to work for the human who invented them. However, as time goes by, the 

robots begin to revolt against humans and fight for their own rights. This play reflects the 

desire of human to enrich daily lives through the use of robots, as well as the consequence 

it may lead to. From then on, the term “robot” began to be widespread and adopted in 

many domains to describe the human-like machines that work to assist humans. 

Figure 1. The humanoid automation created by Da Vinci (Möller, 2005) 

In 1927, Roy J. Wensley invented the humanoid “Televox,” which is likely the first 

actual robot and can be controlled by means of specific voice input (Figure 2). Later on, 

Elektro was on exhibit at the 1939 New York World's Fair with his mechanical dog Sparko 

(Figure 3). He can walk by voice command, speak about 700 words, smoke cigarettes, and 

blow up balloons. These brilliant inventions immediately caught people‟s eyes and 

encouraged them to continue bringing their dreams to reality. Afterwards, the term 

“robotics” appeared in the science fiction “I, Robot” to describe this field of study. The 

three laws of robotics were also proposed to address the interaction between robots and 

human beings (Asimov, 1942). 

2 



Figure 2. Roy J. Wensley and his humanoid Televox (Hoggett, 2009) 

Figure 3. Elektro (middle) and Sparko (left) (McKellar, 2006) 

In late 20th century, a robot was defined as “a reprogrammable and multifunctional 

manipulator designed to move materials, parts, tools, or specialized devices through 

various programmed motions for the performance of a variety of tasks” (Robot Institute of 

America, 1979). Nevertheless, this fails to include the broad range of robotics in modern 

development. At present, the robots are more than agents that help to perform the repetitive 

works. Moreover, they are expected to cooperate with human beings. Generally speaking, 

according to the application fields, robots can be categorized as industrial robots and 

service robots. The different purposes and characteristics of these two types of robots are 

discussed in the following context. 

3 


1.1 Industrial Robots 

4 


ISO 8373 (International Standard Organization, 1994) defines an industrial robot as 

“an automatically controlled, reprogrammable, and multipurpose manipulator 

programmable in three or more axes, which may be either fixed in place or mobile for use 

in industrial automation applications.” On the basis of this concept, industrial robots are 

intended to assist humans in repetitive tasks, so that the efficiency can be improved 

through the automation of manufacturing processes. For this purpose, industrial robots do 

not need to resemble real humans. Instead, they are designed to imitate body movements of 

humans. Thus, an industrial robot generally comes in the form of an articulated robotic arm. 

Typical applications can be seen in assembly, packaging (Figure 4a), painting (Figure 4b) 

and so on. In addition, industrial robots can be seen in the agricultural (Figure 5a) and food 

industries (Figure 5b) as well. 

(a) (b) 

Figure 4. (a) An industrial robot for packaging (Gromyko, 2009); (b) an industrial robot 

for printing (Schaefer, 2008) 


(a) (b) 

5 


Figure 5. (a) An industrial robot for cookie manufacturing (Garcia et al., 2007); (b) an 

agricultural robot for apple grading (Billingsley et al., 2009) 

1.2 Service Robots 

According to the International Federation of Robotics (IFR), a service robot is a robot 

which operates semi- or fully autonomously to perform services useful to the well-being of 

humans and equipment, excluding manufacturing operations. Generally, service robots 

include cleaning robots, assistive robots, wheelchair robots, guide robots, entertainment 

robots, and educational robots. For example, Figure 6 depicts a robot suit which helps to 

enhance the strength of caregiver (Satoh et al., 2009). Besides, as shown in Figure 7, 

robotic wheelchairs with the functions of navigation and motion planning allow people 

with limited mobility, such as the elderly and the disabled, to move freely and easily 

(Prassler et al., 2001; Pineau and Atrash, 2007). 

Figure 6. Robot suit HAL for bathing care assistance (Satoh et al., 2009) 


(a) (b) 

6 


Figure 7. The robotic wheelchairs (a) MAid (Prassler et al., 2001) (b) SmartWheeler (Pineau and 

Atrash, 2007) 

In addition to the basic requirements of service robots, the need for robots facilitating 

healthcare for the elderly, both physiologically and psychologically, is also becoming an 

urgent issue in the aging society. Interactive autonomous robots behave autonomously 

using various kinds of sensors and actuators, and can react to stimulation by its 

environment, including interacting with a human. Seal robot Paro is an example of 

robot-assisted therapy for improving human mind at hospitals or institutions (Wada et al., 

2008), as shown in Figure 8. Besides, Lytle (2002) reported that Matsushita electrics had 

developed a robotic care bear whose purpose was to watch over the elderly residents in a 

hi-tech retirement center. These modern applications of service robots significantly 

improve the quality of life for the elderly. 

Figure 8. Paro interacting with the elderly in a nursing home (Wada et al., 2008) 

In health care applications, telepresence robots, which let a person be in two places at 

once, are also of great interest. The remote-controlled robot “Rosie” stands 65 inches tall 

and has a computer-screen head which serves as a physician‟s eyes and ears, as shown in 

Figure 9. Its two-way audio and video capabilities enable individuals to be physically 



located in one location and virtually present in another at the same time. The robot allows 

medical assessments and diagnoses to take place in real-time. Patient-specific medical data, 

such as ultrasound images, can be transmitted through the wireless Internet. Medical 

personnel can discuss treatment plans and interact with patients remotely. By serving as an 

extension of physician-patient contact, patients feel more satisfied because physicians 

seem to spend more time with them (Gerrard et al., 2010). 

Figure 9. Physicians operate the robot to visit patients (Gerrard et al., 2010) 

2. Human-robot interaction 

As introduced in section 1, robots are becoming more common and have changed the 

way we live. In such an environment, humans need to interact with robots to perform the 

tasks or access the service they provide. Thus, the interaction between human and robot is 

of great concern in the development of robotics. Human-robot interaction (HRI) is a 

multidisciplinary study that requires contributions from robotics, human-computer 

interaction, human factors engineering, artificial intelligence, and some other research 

fields. The origin of HRI as a discrete problem can be traced back to Asimov‟s three laws 

of robotics (Asimov, 1941): 

(1) A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come 

to harm. 

(2) A robot must obey any orders given to it by human beings, except where such orders 

would conflict with the First Law. 

(3) A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the 

First or Second Law. 

These three laws mainly point out the HRI issue in terms of safety. Under this concept, 

robot and human should be regarded as separate individuals that do not conflict with each 

other. Besides, in order that a robot can obey the orders given by human beings, a control 

mechanism enabling the robot to perceive humans and make responses is required. 

7 



Moreover, as humans wish to have human-like robots as assistants or servants, 

anthropomorphic characteristics help to meet this expectation. Considering these issues 

with respect to human-robot interaction, the associated research topics will be discussed in 

the following paragraphs. 

2.1 Safety 

Safety is the primer issue in human-robot interaction. Since robots are designed to 

assist humans, they should not bother or even harm humans during operation. In order to 

expand safety awareness throughout the robotics industry, the Robotic Industries 

Association (RIA) has released ANSI/RIA R15.06 in 1992. It is an American national 

standard that provides information and guidance in safeguarding personnel from injury in 

robotic-production applications. Internationally, ISO 10218 (2006) describes the basic 

hazards associated with robots and provides requirements to reduce the resulting risks. On 

the basis of these standards, researchers and practitioners are striving to provide safety 

assessment in the use of robots. 

In human-robot interaction, especially the industrial robots, the hazards may come 

from impact or collision, crushing or trapping, and some other accidents. In order to 

prevent against the possible accidents and injuries, special attentions should be given to the 

workplace layout, sensors, and emergency-off devices of the robots. 

Through careful workplace layout, humans and robots can be separated in different 

blocks to avoid direct contacts. The work envelope of a robot defines the space that it can 

reach. Thus, while designing the layout, it is critical to prevent personnel from entering this 

dangerous area in case that a collision happens. In addition, with the support of computer 

technologies, it is possible to simulate the physical interaction between humans and robots. 

For example, Oberer et al. (2006) used the CAD models of the human operator and the 

robot to conduct impact simulation to assess the injury severity for a human operator 

(Figure 10). 

8 


Figure 10. Impact simulation (Oberer et al., 2006) 

9 


Ideally, careful workplace layout helps to eliminate the risk of impact or collision. 

However, in most cases, the space is too limited to enable such practices. Thus, it requires 

both human and robot to be aware of the possible impacts. For human operators, warning 

signs and sounds are usually used to alert them whenever collision is about to happen. But 

when the human operator concentrates too much on the task and fails to detect that, these 

warning messages won‟t work. In such a condition, providing sensors with the robots gives 

a feasible solution. For example, if the robot can “see” the human operator by means of 

CCD camera and computer vision techniques, it can stop moving to avoid collision with 

the human in time. Moreover, while a robot is approaching the human but both of them do 

not notice that, an emergency-off (EMO) device allows a third person to prevent against 

the accident. By pushing the EMO button, the power supply of the robot can be 

disconnected immediately to ensure the safety of human beings. 

2.2 Control 

Effective control methods are essential for guiding robots to follow the orders given 

by human beings. Technically, the means of control depend on the application field of 

robots. Autonomous robots are driven by preprogrammed commands. As the power is 

turned on, the robot starts to execute the commands and then performs a series of actions. 

In such applications, computer programming is of great concern. However, the robot itself 

seems not to really make interaction with human, unless it is equipped with sensors to 

detect human and make real-time response. Neves and Oliveira (1997) divide the control 

system of autonomous robots into three levels, including reflexive level, reactive level, and 

cognitive level. At the reflexive level, robot behaviors are developed in a pure 

stimulus-response way, which involves only the sensors. To the reactive level, actions are 

quickly made to the pre-defined problems based on a database of robot behaviors. As the 

complexity increases and results in heavier computation, it goes to the cognitive level 

which requires decision making. Combining these features, autonomous robots can be 

intelligent and interact well with the environment and human. Takahashi et al. (2010) 



developed a mobile robot for transport called MKR. MKR is able to identify the obstacles 

and perform real-time path planning, so that it can avoid collision with humans or objects, 

as shown in Figure 11. 

Figure 11. The autonomous robot MKR (Takahashi et al., 2010) 

For manual controlled robots, the control panel is either connected to the robot or 

located remotely. No matter which approach is adopted, it is necessary to provide 

appropriate user interface for control. The key elements to a good interface design 

generally depend on the nature of the task and user. Concerning the task, it needs to be 

simple and intuitive to avoid possible errors or mistakes. From the user‟s point of view, an 

operational process that meets human‟s expectation helps to enhance the efficiency of 

control. This is in relation to the mental model of the user. Due to the diversity of human 

beings, related knowledge of engineering psychology and human factors engineering 

should be considered to ensure the usability of interface design. In addition to the mental 

factors, physical characteristics of humans are also important to the success of interface 

design. For example, the button size is required to fit the finger size of target users, so that 

they can perform the operation smoothly with ease. 

Figure 12. The robot controlled by a waistcoat (Suomela and Halme, 2001) 

10 



The robots controlled remotely, which are also referred to as teleoperated robots, 

involve more complicated HRI issues rather than interface design. Since the user is not 

beside the robot, cameras and microphones are needed to allow the operator to see and hear 

exactly what the robot does. In other words, the humans should be able to feel as if they are 

present during remote operation. This is known as “telepresence." In the development of 

telepresence robots, advanced devices that provide sensory stimuli are critical. As the user 

gets more immersed into the remote environment, the performance of control and 

interaction will be better. Adalgeirsson and Breazeal (2010) presented the design and 

implementation of MeBot, a robotic platform for socially embodied telepresence (Figure 

13). This telerobot communicates with human by more than simply audio or video but also 

expressive gestures and body pose. And it was found that a more engaging and enjoyable 

interaction is achieved through this practice. 

Figure 13. The telepresence robot MeBot (Adalgeirsson and Breazeal, 2010) 

2.3 Anthropomorphism 

Since the early development of robotics, there has been a significant trend toward 

anthropomorphizing robots to exhibit human-like appearance and behavior. In this way, 

people can interact with robots in the ways that they are familiar with. As the level of 

anthropomorphism goes higher, the interaction performance can be further improved (Li et 

al., 2010). A simple example can be seen in an articulated robotic arm, which is based on 

the structure of the human arm and serves as a third arm for human to enhance the 

productivity. From this point of view, techniques contributing to a higher level of 

anthropomorphism of robots play an important role in the study of HRI. 

One approach to make robots more anthropomorphic concentrates on building the 

appearance, usually the robot head or face. This is because people generally recognize a 

person by the face. If the robot head produces human-like expressions, people may find it 

friendlier to interact with. A typical application is the robotic creature Kismet, an 

expressive anthropomorphic robot as shown in Figure 14. It is the first autonomous robot 

11 



explicitly designed to explore face-to-face interactions with people (Breazeal, 2002). 

Besides, Michaud et al. (2005) designed Roball, a ball-shaped robot, which can effectively 

draw the attention of young children and interact with them in simple ways. Figure 15 

shows the Roball and the interaction between a child and Roball. 

Figure 14. The sociable robot Kismet (Coradeschi et al., 2006) 

Figure 15. Roball and its interaction with a child (Michaud et al., 2005) 

In addition to a human-like face, the humanoid body further makes a robot more 

anthropomorphic. Combining the robot head with the torso, arms and legs, it comes closer 

to the realization of an artificial human. Nevertheless, human-like arms and legs are not 

sufficient for a humanoid robot. The robot also needs to have the ability of mimicking 

human motions, so that it can move as human does. This is enabled by collaborative efforts 

among a number of research fields, such as anatomy, kinematics and biomechanics. 

Furthermore, if the robot is intended to make decision and react to the environment as 

human does, human behavior modeling should be taken into consideration as well. As it 

further relates to the study of psychology and sociology, the complexity thus increases 

considerably. Figure 16(a) illustrates the humanoid robot ASIMO developed by Honda, 

which was intended to act as a human servant (Garcia et al., 2007). Besides, as shown in 

Figure 16(b), Aldebaran Robotics has developed the humanoid robot Nao, which can 

interact with both human and robot. 

12 


(a) (b) 

13 


Figure 16. Humanoid robots (a) ASIMO (Garcia et al., 2007) and (b) Nao (Aldebaran 

Robotics, 2010) 

3. Design elements for good human-robot interaction 

In section 2, the major domains of HRI issues and some related applications, 

including safety, control, and anthropomorphism have been reviewed. On the basis of these 

topics, some design elements contributing to good human-robot interaction need to be 

further highlighted for successful implementation. This section will discuss these design 

elements along with the associated technologies and future trends. 

Equipped with the capabilities to detect humans or objects in the environment and to 

react accordingly, the robot can perform autonomous behaviors for the safe use and a 

stronger interaction. In order to enhance the performance of control, the interface needs to 

follow the principles of user-centered design. Further, for a more immersive telepresence, 

sensory enhancing elements including stereoscopic and stereophonic perception, as well as 

supersensory, can make great contributions to stronger human-robot interaction. Moreover, 

through the realization of anthropomorphism, human-robot interaction will become as 

natural as interpersonal communication. This can be achieved by providing humanoid 

elements and enabling eye contact between human and robot. Finally, in order to enable 

seamless dataflow, a robust system for data transmission should be adopted. Table 1 

summarizes these elements and the associated technologies. 

TABLE 1. Design elements and associated technologies for good HRI 

Design elements Associated technologies 

Autonomous behaviors sensors and actuator, path planning 

User interface human-computer interaction, teleoperation, virtual reality 

Sensory enhancing 

elements 

telepresence, multi-sensory stimulation, binocular and 

panoramic vision, stereo audio, virtual reality 



Anthropomorphism humanoid appearance, expression, and motion 

Eye contact camera and screen with specific placement 

Data transmission RF and Internet transmission, time-delay improved algorithm 

3.1 Autonomous behaviors 

In pure human-robot interaction, autonomous behaviors of the robot are generally 

designed for the safety of use. For collision prevention, the active identification of possible 

obstacles in a reasonable distance is required. This involves three design elements: the 

sensors, an intelligent system for path planning, and the actuators. Yasuda et al. (2009) 

applied fuzzy logic to develop strategies for collision prevention of a powered wheelchair, 

which is equipped with a laser range sensor and a position sensitive diode sensor to 

observe the front and both sides (Figure 17). Combining these elements, the robotic 

wheelchair can either slow down to stop or directly modify the path setting to avoid 

obstacles. Besides, Candido et al. (2008) proposed a hierarchical motion planner for an 

autonomous humanoid robot. Based on this motion planner, the robot can generate a 

feasible path to finish its walk without making collision or falls, as shown in Figure 18. 

Figure 17. The robotic wheelchair and its structure of operation (Yasuda et al., 2009) 

14 



Figure 18. The humanoid robot that is capable for path planning (Candido et al., 2008) 

As for human-robot-human interaction, in which the robot serves as an interface for 

communication between people situated in two places, the autonomous behaviors become 

more important for a successful interaction. In such applications of telepresence robotics, 

the person who operates the robot remotely is called the user, whereas the other person 

interacting directly with the robot is assigned as a participant. From the user‟s perspective, 

autonomous behaviors of the robot extends the capability of projection to operate the robot 

reliably in a dynamic environment. From the participant‟s view, autonomous behaviors 

also increase the interactive capability of the participant as a dialogist. For example, a 

telepresence robot with the autonomous behavior of identifying the direction of the 

participant who is speaking can assist the remote user to respond more quickly and 

properly. This is achieved by adopting cameras, microphones, and a dedicated software 

system for recognition. 

An interactive museum tour-guide robot, as shown in Figure 19, was developed by 

two research projects TOURBOT and WebFAIR funded by the European Union (Burgard 

et al., 1999; Schulz et al., 2000; Trahanias et al., 2005). Thousands of users over the world 

have experienced controlling this robot through the web to visit the museum remotely. 

They developed a modular and distributed software architecture which integrates 

localization, mapping, collision avoidance, planning, and various modules concerned with 

user interaction and web-based telepresence. With these autonomous features, the user can 

operate the robot to move quickly and safely in a museum crowded with visitors. 

15 



Figure 19. An interactive museum tour-guide robot and its GUI (Trahanias et al., 2005) 

3.2 User interface 

The performance of control mainly depends on the usability of user interface. The 

first step toward a usable interface design is to acquire a detailed understanding the 

relationship between the user and the task. This is highly related to the study of human 

factors engineering, which aims to develop user-centered design based on scientific 

evidence. Since the interface of control for robots is usually established on a computer 

system, most of the problems fall within the domain of human-computer interaction (HCI). 

There have been numerous ongoing HCI studies that endeavored to formulate universal 

principles of interface design. The focus tends to be on how users can deal with the tasks 

efficiently without committing errors. To make the design principles into practice, it also 

requires efforts from the fields of computer science and mechanical design. For instance, 

Baker et al. (2004) designed the user interface of the robot for search and rescue toward 

providing easy and intuitive use. As Figure 20 illustrates, the interface helps the user to 

concentrate on the video window without being distracted by additional information. 

Figure 20. The easy and intuitive control interface of the robot (Baker et al., 2004) 

In addition to these basic requirements of user interface, there are some more issues to 

be noted in the modern development of robotics, especially for those with respect to 

teleoperators. A teleoperator is a machine that extends the user‟s sensing and manipulating 

16 



capability to a location remote from that user. Teleoperation refers to direct and continuous 

human control of the teleoperator. Many studies emphasize on enabling the user to modify 

the remote environment (Stoker et al., 1995; Engelberger, 2001; Spudis, 2001), that is, 

projecting the user to the teleoperator. In order to provide the user with a better remote 

interaction, virtual reality can be applied to create an environment with more realistic 

immersion. With a head-mounted display, the user can really feel that he/she is present at 

the remote location. Further, wired gloves that offer tactile feedbacks as if the user really 

touches what the robot does. 

The Full-Immersion Telepresence Testbed (FITT) developed by NASA, which 

combines a wearable interface integrating human perception, cognition and eye-hand 

coordination skills with a robot‟s physical abilities, as shown in Figure 21, is a recent 

example of advent in teleoperation (Rehnmark et al., 2005). The teleoperated master-slave 

system Robonaut allows an intuitive, one-to-one mapping between master and slave 

motions. The operator uses the FITT wearable interface to remotely control the Robonaut 

to follow the operator‟s motion fully in simultaneous operation to perform complex tasks 

in the international space station. 

3.3 Sensory enhancing elements 

Figure 21. FITT and Robonaut (Rehnmark et al., 2005) 

In telepresence, stereoscopic and stereophonic elements are often emphasized to 

create the illusion of remote environment, which increases the feeling of immersion for the 

user. For example, the user can identify the distance between an object and the 

telepresence robot by binocular vision (Brooker et al., 1999). In addition, Boutteau et al. 

(2008) developed an omnidirectional stereoscopic system for the mobile robot navigation. 

As shown in Figure 22, the 360-degree field of view enables the remote operator to have a 

more detailed understanding about the environment. Moreover, the head-related transfer 

function (HRTF) for stereophonic effect further enables the user to identify the location 

and direction of a sound (Hawksford, 2002). 

17 



Figure 22. The robot with a stereoscopic system (Boutteau et al., 2005) 

For teleoperated robots, stereoscopic and stereophonic elements also help to enhance 

the feel of presence during operation. In the design of teleoperators, these elements can be 

added to provide stronger interaction by adopting the technologies involved in telepresence 

videoconferencing. As many practices show, telepresence videoconferencing enables the 

users and the participants to communicate more efficiently. For example, Lei et al. (2004) 

proposed a representation and reconstruction module for an image-based telepresence 

system, using a viewpoint-adaptation scheme and an image-based rendering technique. 

This system provides life-size views and 3D perception of participants and viewers in real 

time and hence improves the interaction. 

Supersensory refers to an advanced capability to modify the remote environment 

provided by a dexterous robot or a precise telepresence system. From the user‟s view, the 

user‟s manipulative efficiency for special tasks is enhanced when projecting onto a 

telepresence robot with supersensory. Green et al. (1995) developed a telepresence surgery 

system integrating vision, hearing and manipulation. It consists of two main modules: a 

surgeon‟s console and a remote surgical unit located at the surgical table. The remote unit 

provides scaled motion, force reflection and minimized friction for the surgeon to carry out 

complex tasks with quick, precise motions. Similar applications of supersensory in 

telepresence surgery can be also seen in the studies of Satava (1999), Schurr et al., (2000), 

and Ballantyne (2002). 

Supersensory elements can also provide the user with a novel immersion feeling in a 

remote environment. For example, the user can control the zoom function of the camera on 

a telepresence robot to observe the small details of the remote environment, which the user 

does not normally see with the naked eye. Intuitive Surgery (2010) developed the da 

Vinci® Surgical System through the use of supersensory in telepresence. As Figure 23 

shows, the da Vinci Surgical System consists of an ergonomically designed surgeon‟s 

console, a patient-side cart with four interactive robotic arms, and the high-performance 

vision system. Powered by state-of-the-art robotic technology, the surgeon‟s hand 

movements are scaled, filtered and seamlessly translated into precise movements. 

18 



Figure 23. The da Vinci® Surgical System (Intuitive Surgery, 2010) 

3.4 Anthropomorphism 

As the robot resembles human more, the human-robot interaction comes closer to 

interpersonal communication. Thus, anthropomorphism of robots helps to enhance the 

performance of human-robot interaction by means of creating an environment that humans 

are more familiar with. Generally, this is enabled by providing humanoid appearance, 

expression, and motion. Coradeschi et al. (2006) addressed that appearance and behaviors 

of robot are essential in human-robot interaction. A robot‟s appearance influences subject‟s 

impressions, and it is an important factor in evaluating the interaction. Humanlike 

appearance can be deceiving, convincing users that robot can understand and do much 

more than they actually can. Observable behaviors are gaze, posture, movement patterns 

and linguistic interactions. 

Ishiguro created a humanoid robot by copying the appearance of him. As Figure 24 

presents, he constructed this robot with silicone rubber, pneumatic actuators, powerful 

electronics, and hair from his own scalp. Although it is not able to move, this robot 

however meets the expectation of mimicking a real person‟s appearance (Guizzo, 2010). 

An alternative approach to provide a humanoid appearance is by displaying the face of the 

remote user on a telepresence robot. For interacting with the participants, the user‟s face 

displayed on a LCD screen is incorporated in many telepresence robots. Dr. Robot and the 

telepresence system PEBBLES both use a LCD screen to display the user‟s face, which 

allows the participants to realize whom the telepresence robot represents. The commercial 

product “Giraffe” (2007), a remote-controlled mobile video conferencing platform, is also 

a telepresence robot application. It is composed of two subsystems: the client application, 

and the Giraffe robot itself. On the Giraffe robot, there is a video screen and camera 

mounted on an adjustable height robotic base. The user can move the Giraffe robot from 

afar using the client application. Software that runs on a standard PC with a webcam 

19 



enables the user connects to the distant Giraffe robot through the Internet for a telepresence 

interaction. 

Figure 24. Ishiguro and the humanoid robot (Guizzo, 2010) 

There are many other solutions for presenting anthropomorphic elements, such as the 

humanoid expressions. For example, as depicted in Figure 14, the humanoid robot Kismet 

is installed with mechanical facial expressions to make face-to-face interaction with 

humans (Breazeal, 2002). Besides, Berns and Hirth (2006) developed a humanoid robot 

face ROMAN. As Figure 25 shows, the mechanical structure allows ROMAN to make 

facial expressions such as anger, disgust, fear, happiness, sadness and surprise. Facial 

expressiveness in humanoid-type robots has received a lot of attention because it is a key 

component to developing personal attachment with human users. From a psychological 

point of view, using facial expressions is an effective method to build personal attachment 

in communicating with a human user. 

Figure 25. The expressive robot head ROMAN (Berns and Hirth, 2006) 

Moreover, human-like motions extend the anthropomorphism of robots to a higher 

level. This involves the efforts from motion capture, biomechanics, kinematics, and 

statistical methods. For example, Chen (2010) employed a high-speed video camera to 

capture the jumping procedure of human and then conducted kinematic analysis, which 

helps to develop a human jumping robot. In addition, Kim et al. (2006) adapted the human 

motion capture data and formulated an inverse kinematics problem. By optimizing the 

problem, the robot is able to imitate human arm motion. 

20 


3.5 Eye contact 

21 


Eye contact is an important element in human-to-human communication. It is a 

well-known cue for gaining attention and attracting interest. In human-robot interaction, a 

robot with eye contact can make the user feel more familiar and comfortable to interact 

with. Yamato et al. (2003) focused on the effect that recommendations made by the agent 

or robot had on user decisions, and designed a “color name selection task” to determine the 

key factors in designing interactively communicating robots. They used two robots as the 

robot/agent for comparison. Based on the experimental results, eye contact and 

attention-sharing are considered to be important features of communications that display 

and recognize the attention of participants. 

In social psychology, joint attention is people who are communicating with each other 

frequently focus on the same object. The joint attention is a mental state where two people 

not only pay attention to the same information but also notice the other‟s attention to it. 

Imai et al. (2003) investigates situated utterance generation in human-robot interaction. In 

their study, a person has joint attention with a robot to identify the object indicated by a 

situated utterance generation generated by the robot named Robovie. A psychological 

experiment was conducted to verify the effect of eye contact on achieving joint attention. 

According to the experimental results, it was found that a relationship developed by eye 

contact produces a more fundamental effect on communications than logical reasoning or 

knowledge processing. 

In telepresence applications, eye contact can increase the immersion feeling of the 

user and the interactive capability of the participant as a dialogist. It is very difficult to 

achieve eye contact during interpersonal communication between the user and the 

participant through a telepresence robot when the face of the user is displayed on a LCD 

screen, because the placement of the camera on a telepresence robot is usually on top of 

the LCD screen, which hinders direct eye contact between the user and the participant 

through the telepresence robot. DVE Telepresence (2005) developed a novel LCE screen 

by setting the internal camera just behind the monitor. It provides natural face-to-face and 

eye contact communication without causing eyestrain. By adopting advanced devices like 

this, it is possible to ensure high-quality eye contact in robotics, which contributes to a 

stronger interaction and enhanced performance. 

3.6 Data transmission 

The transmission of control commands and sensory feedback is a basic design 

element for the connection between human and robot. Without this back support, it is not 

possible to realize real-time teleoperation and telepresence. Thus, the related development 



in communication engineering also plays an important role in robotics. Generally, wireless 

radio frequency and Internet are used in most telepresence applications, and dedicated lines 

are used in specific applications (such as operation in space and deep sea). For example, 

Winfield and Holland (2000) proposed a communication and control infrastructure for 

distributed mobile robotics through the use of wireless local area network (WLAN) 

technology and Internet Protocols (IPs), which results in a powerful platform for collective 

or cooperative robotics. The infrastructure described is equally applicable to tele-operated 

mobile robots. In addition, considering cost efficiency and ease of use, Lister and 

Wunderlich (2002) made use of radio frequency (RF) for mobile robot control. They also 

explored software methods to correct errors that may develop in RF communication. 

In order to realize real-time communications, the speed of transmission is taken into 

consideration as well. This is in relation to the effective techniques in data compression 

and decompression, error control, and so on. Combined with adequate algorithms of 

reactive functions, robots can respond to the human user in a reasonable time. Nevertheless, 

the respond time is not suggested to be as short as possible. Instead, Shiwa et al. (2009) 

conducted some experiments and claimed that people prefer one-second delayed responses 

from the robot rather than immediate responses. Thus, delaying strategy is adopted by 

adding conversational fillers to the robot, so that the robot seems to make a pause for 

thinking prior to communicating with the human. This example shows that the issues in 

data transmission are related to not only the speed but also the modality of stimulus 

presentation. 

4. Concluding remarks 

Human-robot interaction is a growing field of research and application, which 

includes lots of topics and associated challenges. With the multidisciplinary efforts, there is 

a global trend toward natural interaction and higher performance. In this chapter, we 

discussed the highlighted HRI topics and related practices to provide conceptual ideas of 

how interaction affects the development of robotics. In addition, the according design 

elements for good human-robot interaction are also presented to serve as a further 

reference. 

In the future development of human-robot interaction, people are looking forward to 

the intelligent robots that can interact with users as human beings do. However, although 

anthropomorphic characteristics make the robots more similar to real humans and thus are 

appealing to many users, there are still a number of barriers and challenges to be addressed. 

As the theory of “uncanny valley” describes, when robots look and act almost like real 

humans, it however causes a response of revulsion among human users and participants 

(Mori, 1970). That is to say, human likeness of the robot is not always positively correlated 

22 



to the perceived familiarity. If the details of behaviors do not match the high realism of 

appearance, the robot will produce a negative impression to humans. As a result, related 

technologies are required to cross or avoid the uncanny valley. 

One possibility is to develop complete human-like appearance and behaviors for the 

robot simultaneously. Nevertheless, there seems a long way to go before overcoming the 

difficulties in human modeling and other related technologies. An alternative is to make the 

robot as an agent of the distant user by implementing telepresence and teleoperation. 

Enabled by telepresence, the human users on both sides appear to communicate with each 

other by means of one-to-one-scale video in real time. Then the robots reproduce the 

actions that the distant user intended to perform via teleoperation. In this way, it is also 

similar to the real human-to-human interaction, although the anthropomorphism of the 

robot is not really in a high level. 

Last but not least, no matter how closely a robot resembles a real human or how 

powerful it is, safety will always be the most essential issue in human-robot interaction. As 

Asimov‟s three laws of human-robot interaction indicate, human and robot must cooperate 

with each other upon the principle of not conflicting with each other. After all, it may go 

back to the ethics and morality with regard to human interaction, just as the relationships 

among human beings that we have gotten used to. 

References 

Adalgeirsson, SO and Breazeal, C: 2010, MeBot: A robotic platform for socially 

embodied telepresence, Proceedings of the 5th ACM/IEEE International Conference on 

Human-Robot Interaction: 15-22, Osaka, Japan. 

Aldebaran Robotics: 2010, retrieved from http://www.aldebaran-robotics.com/ 

Asimov, I: 1942, Runaround, Street & Smith Press, United States. 

Baker, M, Casey, R, Keyes, B and Yanco, HA: 2004, Improved Interfaces for 

Human-Robot Interaction in Urban Search and Rescue, Proceedings of the IEEE 

International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Hague, the Netherlands. 

Ballantyne, GH, 2002: Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence, and 

telementoring - Review of early clinical results, Surgical Endoscopy and Other 

Interventional Techniques 16(10): 1389-1402. 

23 


24 


Berns, K and Hirth, J: 2006, Control of facial expressions of the humanoid robot head 

ROMAN, Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and 

Systems: 3119-3124, Beijing, China. 

Billingsley, J, Oetomo, D and Reid, J: 2009, Agricultural robotics, IEEE Robotics & 

Automation Magazine 16(4): 16-16, 19. 

Boutteau, R, Savatier, X, Ertaud, JY and Mazari, B: 2008, An omnidirectional 

stereoscopic system for mobile robot navigation, Proceedings of the International 

Workshop on Robotic and Sensors Environments (ROSE): 138-143, Ottawa, Canada. 

Breazeal, CL: 2002, Designing Sociable Robots, The MIT Press. 

Brooker, JP, Sharkey, PM, Wann, JP, and Plooy, AM: 1999, A helmet mounted display 

system with active gaze control for visual telepresence, Mechatronics 9(7): 703-716. 

Burgard, W, Cremers, AB, Fox, D, Hahnel, D, Lakemeyer, G, Schulz, D, Steiner, W, 

and Thrun, S: 1999, Experiences with an interactive museum tour-guide robot, Artificial 

Intelligence 114(1-2): 3-55. 

Candido, S, Kim, YT and Hutchinson, S: 2008, An Improved Hierarchical Motion 

Planner for Humanoid Robots, Proceedings of the IEEE-RAS International Conference on 

Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), Daejeon, Korea. 

Chen Y: 2010, Motion mechanism and simulation of the human jumping robot, 

Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Design and Applications 

(ICCDA) 3: 361-364, Qinhuangdao, China 

Coradeschi, S, Ishiguro, H, Asada, M, Shapiro, SC, Thielscher, M, Breazeal, C, 

Mataric, MJ, and Ishida, H: 2006, Human-Inspired Robots, IEEE Intelligent Systems 21(4): 

74-85. 

Dr. Robot, http://www.intouch-health.com/ 

DVE Telepresence, http://www.dvetelepresence.com/ 

Engelberger, G: 2001, NASA's Robonaut, Industrial Robot 28(1): 35-39. 

Garcia, E, Jimenez, MA, De Santos, PG and Armada, M: 2007, The evolution of 

robotics research, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 14(1): 90-103. 



Gerrard, A, Tusia, J, Pomeroy, B, Dower, A and Gillis, J: 2010, On-call 

physician-robot dispatched to remote Labrador, News in Health, Media Centre, Dalhousie 

University, Canada. 

Giraffe, http://www.headthere.com/products.html/ 

Green, PS, Hill, JW, Jensen, JF, and Shah, A: 1995, Telepresence surgery, IEEE 

Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine 14(3): 324-329. 

Gromyko, A: 2009, Palletising_robot.jpg, retrieved from: 

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/ File:Palletising_robot.jpg/ 

56. 

Guizzo, E: 2010, The man who made a copy of himself, IEEE Spectrum 47(4): 44 – 

Hawksford, MOJ: 2002, Scalable multichannel coding with HRTF enhancement for 

DVD and virtual sound systems, Journal of the Audio Engineering Society 50(11): 

894-913. 

Hoggett, R: 2009, TelevoxWensley21Feb1928.jpg, retrieved from: 

http://cyberneticzoo.com/?p=656/ 

Imai, M, Ono, T, and Ishiguro, H: 2003, Physical relation and expression: joint 

attention for human-robot interaction, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics 50(4): 

636-643. 

International Standard Organization: 1994, ISO 8373: Manipulating industrial 

robots – Vocabulary. 

International Standard Organization: 2006, ISO 10218-1: Robots for industrial 

environments - Safety requirements - Part 1: Robot. 

Intuitive Surgical: 2010, da Vinci® Surgical System, 

http://www.intuitivesurgical.com/index.aspx 

Kim, CH, Kim, D and Oh, YH: 2006, Adaptation of human motion capture data to 

humanoid robots for motion imitation using optimization, Journal of Integrated 

Computer-Aided Engineering 13(4): 377-389. 

Lei, BJ, Chang, C, and Hendriks, EA: 2004, An efficient image-based telepresence 

system for videoconferencing, IEEE Transactions on Circuits and Systems for Video 

Technology 14(3): 335-347. 

25 



Li, D, Rau PL, and Li, Y: 2010, A Cross-cultural Study: Effect of Robot Appearance 

and Task, International Journal of Social Robotics 2(2): 175-186. 

Lister, MB and Wunderlich, JT: 2002, Development of software for mobile robot 

control over a radio frequency communications link, Proceedings of IEEE Southeast 

Conference: 414 – 417, Columbia, United States. 

Lytle, JM: 2002, Robot care bears for the elderly, BBC News, Thursday, 21 February, 

2002. 

McKellar, I: 2006, Elektro and Sparko, retrieved from: http://www.flickr.com/photos/ 

76722295@N00/263022490/ 

Möller, E: 2005, Leonardo-Robot3.jpg, retrieved from 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Leonardo-Robot3.jpg/ 

Mori, M: 1970, The uncanny valley, Energy 7(4): 33-35. 

Neves, M and Oliveira, E: 1997, A control architecture for an autonomous mobile 

robot, Proceedings of First International Conference on Autonomous Agents, California, 

USA. 

Oberer, S, Malosio, M, and Schraft, RD: 2006, Investigation of Robot-Human Impact, 

Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Robotics 87-103. 

PEBBLES, http://www.ryerson.ca/pebbles/ 

Pineau, J and Atrash, A: 2007, SmartWheeler: A robotic wheelchair test-bed for 

investigating new models of human-robot interaction, AAAI Spring Symposium on 

Multidisciplinary Collaboration for Socially Assistive Robotics. 

Prassler, E, Scholz, J, and Fiorini, P: 2001, A robotics wheelchair for crowded public 

environment, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 8(1): 38-45 

Rehnmark, F, Bluethmann, W, Mehling, J, Ambrose, RO, Diftler, M, Chu, M, and 

Necessary, R: 2005, Robonaut: the „short list‟ of technology hurdles, Computer 38(1): 

28-37. 

Robot Institute of America: 1979, RIA Worldwide Robotics Survey and Directory, 

Robotic Institute of America, P.O. Box 1366, Dearborn, Michigan, U.S.A. 

26 



Satava, RM: 1999, Emerging technologies for surgery in the 21st century, Archives of 

Surgery 134(11): 1197-1202. 

Satoh, H, Kawabata, T and Sankai, Y: 2009, Bathing care assistance with robot suit 

HAL, Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, 

498-503, Guilin, China. 

Schaefer, MT: 2008, Bios_robotlab_writing_robot.jpg, retrieved from: 

http://commons.wikimedia.org/ wiki/File:Bios_robotlab_writing_robot.jpg 

Schulz, D, Burgard, W, Fox, D, Thrun, S, and Cremers, AB: 2000, Web interfaces for 

mobile robots in public places, IEEE Robotics & Automation magazine 7(1): 48-56. 

Schurr, MO, Buess, G, Neisius, B, and Voges, U: 2000, Robotics and telemanipulation 

technologies for endoscopic surgery - A review of the ARTEMIS project, Surgical 

Endoscopy and other Interventional Techniques 14(4): 375-381. 

Spudis PD: 2001, The case for renewed human exploration of the Moon, Earth Moon 

and Planets 87(3): 159-169. 

Stoker, CR, Burch, DR, Hine, BP III, and Barry, J: 1995, Antarctic undersea 

exploration using a robotic submarine with a telepresence user interface, IEEE Expert 

10(6): 14-23. 

Suomela, J and Halme, A: 2001, Cognitive Human Machine Interface Of Workpartner 

Robot, Proceedings of Intelligent Autonomous Vehicles 2001 Conference (IAV2001), 

Sapporo, Japan. 

Takahashi, M, Suzuki, T, Shitamoto, H, Moriguchi, T and Yoshida, K: 2010, 

Developing a mobile robot for transport applications in the hospital domain, Robotics and 

Autonomous Systems 58(7): 889-899. 

The Robotic Industries Association: 1992, ANSI/RIA R15.06: Industrial Robots and 

Robot Systems - Safety Requirements, ANSI Standard. 

Trahanias, P, Burgard, W, Argyros, A, Hahnel, D, Baltzakis, H, Pfaff, P, and Stachniss, 

C: 2005, TOURBOT and WebFAIR: Web-operated mobile robots for tele-presence in 

populated exhibitions, IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine 12(2): 77-89. 

Wada, K, Shibata, T, Musha, T and Kimura, S: 2008, Robot therapy for elders affected 

by dementia, IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Magazine 27(4): 53 – 60. 

27 



Winfield, AFT and Holland, OE: 2000, The application of wireless local area network 

technology to the control of mobile robots, Microprocessors and Microsystems 23: 

597–607. 

Yamato, J, Brooks, R, Shinozawa, K, and Naya, F: 2003, Human-Robot Dynamic 

Social Interaction, NTT Technical Review 1(6): 37-43. 

Yasuda, T, Suehiro, N and Tanaka, K: 2009, Strategies for collision prevention of a 

compact powered wheelchair using SOKUIKI sensor and applying fuzzy theory, IEEE 

International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO): 202 – 208, Guilin, 

China. 

Index 

Robot 

Robotics 

Human-robot interaction 

Teleoperation 

Telepresence 

Anthropomorphism 

Biography 

Jun-Ming Lu received his Ph.D. degree in industrial engineering and engineering 

management from National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan, in 2009. He is currently a 

postdoctoral researcher in Gerontechnology Research Center, Yuan Ze University. His 

research interests are ergonomics, digital human modeling, and gerontechnology. 

Tzung-Cheng Tsai received his Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering from Yuan 

Ze University, Taiwan, in 2007. He is currently a researcher in Green Energy & 

Environment Research Laboratories, Industrial Technology Research Institute, Taiwan. 

His research interests are telepresence, teleoperation, and green energy. 

Yeh-Liang Hsu received his Ph.D. degree in mechanical engineering from Stanford 

University, United States, in 1992. He is currently a professor in Department of 

Mechanical Engineering, the director of Gerontechnology Research Center, and the 

28 



secretary general of Yuan Ze University, Taiwan. His research interests are mechanical 

design, design optimization, and gerontechnology. 

29

Interaction between human and robot

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?