Skip Abstract Section
Abstract
Abstract
We consider shared workspace scenarios with humans and robots acting to achieve independent goals, termed as parallel play. We model these as general-sum games and construct a framework that utilizes the Nash equilibrium solution concept to consider the interactive effect of both agents while planning. We find multiple Pareto-optimal equilibria in these tasks. We hypothesize that people act by choosing an equilibrium based on social norms and their personalities. To enable coordination, we infer the equilibrium online using a probabilistic model that includes these two factors and use it to select the robot’s action. We apply our approach to a close-proximity pick-and-place task involving a robot and a simulated human with three potential behaviors—defensive, selfish, and norm-following. We showed that using a Bayesian approach to infer the equilibrium enables the robot to complete the task with less than half the number of collisions while also reducing the task execution time as compared to the best baseline. We also performed a study with human participants interacting either with other humans or with different robot agents and observed that our proposed approach performs similar to human-human parallel play interactions.
- Bansal, S., Cosgun, A., Nakhaei, A., & Fujimura, K. (2018). Collaborative planning for mixed-autonomy lane merging. In 2018 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS).Google Scholar
- Neuronlike adaptive elements that can solve difficult learning control problemsIEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics1983583484610.1109/TSMC.1983.6313077Google ScholarCross Ref
- Brockman, G., Cheung, V., Pettersson, L., Schneider, J., Schulman, J., Tang, J., & Zaremba, W. (2016). Openai gym. arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.01540.Google Scholar
- Carroll, M., Shah, R., Ho, MK., Griffiths, T., Seshia, S., Abbeel, P., & Dragan, A. (2019). On the utility of learning about humans for human-ai coordination. In Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (pp 5175–5186).Google Scholar
- Chen, M., Nikolaidis, S., Soh, H., Hsu, D., & Srinivasa, S. (2018). Planning with trust for human-robot collaboration. In Proceedings of the 2018 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 307–315).Google Scholar
- Diankov, R. (2010). Automated construction of robotic manipulation programs. PhD thesis, Carnegie Mellon University, Robotics Institute.Google Scholar
- Engel, D., Woolley, A. W., Jing, L. X., Chabris, C. F., & Malone, T. W. (2014). Reading the mind in the eyes or reading between the lines? Theory of mind predicts collective intelligence equally well online and face-to-face. PloS One,9(12)Google Scholar
- Fisac, J. F., Bronstein, E., Stefansson, E., Sadigh, D., Sastry, S. S., & Dragan, A. D. (2019). Hierarchical game-theoretic planning for autonomous vehicles. In 2019 International conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) (pp 9590–9596). IEEE.Google Scholar
- Gabler, V., Stahl, T., Huber, G., Oguz, O., & Wollherr, D. (2017). A game-theoretic approach for adaptive action selection in close proximity human-robot-collaboration. In 2017 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA).Google Scholar
- Decision-making authority, team efficiency and human worker satisfaction in mixed human-robot teamsAutonomous Robots201539329331210.1007/s10514-015-9457-9Google ScholarDigital Library
- Hawkins, K. P., Bansal, S., Vo, N. N., & Bobick, A. F. (2014). Anticipating human actions for collaboration in the presence of task and sensor uncertainty. In 2014 ieee international conference on Robotics and automation (ICRA).Google Scholar
- Ho, M. K., MacGlashan, J., Greenwald, A., Littman, M. L., Hilliard, E., Trimbach, C., Brawner, S., Tenenbaum, J., Kleiman-Weiner, M., & Austerweil, J. L. (2016). Feature-based joint planning and norm learning in collaborative games. In CogSciGoogle Scholar
- Evaluating fluency in human-robot collaborationIEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems201949320921810.1109/THMS.2019.2904558Google ScholarCross Ref
- Anticipating human activities using object affordances for reactive robotic responseIEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence2015381142910.1109/TPAMI.2015.2430335Google ScholarDigital Library
- Lavalle, S. M. (1998). Rapidly-exploring random trees: a new tool for path planning. Tech. rep.Google Scholar
- Essentials of game theory: A concise multidisciplinary introductionSynthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning20082118810.2200/S00108ED1V01Y200802AIM003Google ScholarCross Ref
- Li, S., Shah, J. A. (2019). Safe and efficient high dimensional motion planning in space-time with time parameterized prediction. In 2019 international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA).Google Scholar
- Do people play nash equilibrium? Lessons from evolutionary game theoryJournal of Economic Literature199836313471374Google Scholar
- Goal set inverse optimal control and iterative replanning for predicting human reaching motions in shared workspacesIEEE Transactions on Robotics201632489790810.1109/TRO.2016.2581216Google ScholarDigital Library
- Nikolaidis, S., Kuznetsov, A., Hsu, D., & Srinivasa, S. (2016). Formalizing human-robot mutual adaptation: A bounded memory model. In 2016 11th ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI) (pp. 75–82). IEEE.Google Scholar
- Nikolaidis, S., Nath, S., Procaccia, A. D., & Srinivasa, S. (2017). Game-theoretic modeling of human adaptation in human-robot collaboration. In Proceedings of the 2017 ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (pp. 323–331).Google Scholar
- Nikolaidis, S., Ramakrishnan, R., Gu, K., & Shah, J. (2015). Efficient model learning from joint-action demonstrations for human-robot collaborative tasks. In ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction.Google Scholar
- Park, H. W., & Howard, A. M. (2010). Understanding a child’s play for robot interaction by sequencing play primitives using hidden markov models. In 2010 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (pp. 170–177).Google Scholar
- Social participation among pre-school childrenThe Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology193227324310.1037/h0074524Google ScholarCross Ref
- Peters, L., Fridovich-Keil, D., Tomlin, C., & Sunberg, Z. (2020). Inference-based strategy alignment for general-sum differential games. In AAMAS ’20, international foundation for autonomous agents and multiagent systems. https://github.com/lassepe/AAMAS2020-GameInference-Paper/blob/master/submission/ibsa-camera-ready-aamas2020.pdf.Google Scholar
- Does the chimpanzee have a theory of mind?Behavioral and Brain Sciences19781451552610.1017/S0140525X00076512Google ScholarCross Ref
- Sadigh, D., Sastry, S., Seshia, S. A., & Dragan, A. D. (2016a). Planning for autonomous cars that leverage effects on human actions. In Robotics: Science and systems.Google Scholar
- Sadigh, D., Sastry, S. S., Seshia, S. A., & Dragan, A. (2016b). Information gathering actions over human internal state. In 2016 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS) (pp. 66–73). IEEE.Google Scholar
- Social behavior for autonomous vehiclesProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences2019116502497224978404734910.1073/pnas.1820676116Google Scholar
- Silver, D., Huang, A., Maddison, C. J., Guez, A., Sifre, L., Van Den Driessche, G., Schrittwieser, J., Antonoglou, I., Panneershelvam, V., Lanctot, M., Dieleman, S., Grewe, D., Nham, J., Kalchbrenner, N., Sutskever, I., Lillicrap, T., Leach, M., Kavukcuoglu, K., Graepel T., & Hassabis, D. (2016). Mastering the game of go with deep neural networks and tree search. Nature, 529.(7587):484Google Scholar
- A real-time game theoretic planner for autonomous two-player drone racingIEEE Transactions on Robotics20203651389140310.1109/TRO.2020.2994881Google Scholar
- Sucan, I. A., Moll, M., & Kavraki, L. E. (2012). The open motion planning library. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1109/MRA.2012.2205651.Google Scholar
- Temporal difference learning and td-gammonCommunications of the ACM1995383586810.1145/203330.203343Google ScholarDigital Library
- Trautman, P., & Krause, A. (2010). Unfreezing the robot: Navigation in dense, interacting crowds. In 2010 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (pp. 797–803). IEEE.Google Scholar
- Human-like motion planning based on game theoretic decision makingInternational Journal of Social Robotics201911115117010.1007/s12369-018-0487-2Google ScholarCross Ref
- Unhelkar, V. V., Siu, H. C., Shah, J. A. (2014). Comparative performance of human and mobile robotic assistants in collaborative fetch-and-deliver tasks. In ACM/IEEE international conference on human-robot interaction (HRI).Google Scholar
- Ziebart, B. D., Ratliff, N., Gallagher, G., Mertz, C., Peterson, K., Bagnell, J. A., Hebert, M., Dey, A. K., & Srinivasa, S. (2009). Planning-based prediction for pedestrians. In 2009 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (pp. 3931–3936). IEEE.Google Scholar
Comments