Contingency allows the robot to spot the tutor and to learn from interaction

2011 IEEE International Conference on Development and Learning, ICDL 2011

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages

  Lohank, Katrin S ^c   Pitsch, Karola ^c   Rohlfing, Katharina J ^c,d   Fischer, Kerstin ^a   Saunders, Joe ^b   Lehmann, Hagen ^b   Nehaniv, Chrystopher ^b   Wrede, Britta ^c  

^a Institute of Business Communication and Information Science   (Denmark)

^b UNIVERSITY OF HERTFORDSHIRE   (United Kingdom)

^c BIELEFELD UNIVERSITY   (Germany)

^d Emergentist Semantics ^*  (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL SYSTEMS; DEPENDENT VARIABLES; QUALITATIVE METHOD; ROBOTIC PLATFORMS; SEQUENTIAL ANALYSIS; SEQUENTIAL STRUCTURE; SYSTEM MODULES;

QUALITY CONTROL; ROBOTICS;

HUMAN ROBOT INTERACTION;

EID: 80054972259     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/DEVLRN.2011.6037341     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (28)

1. Janet B. Bavelas, Linda Coates, and Trudy Johnson. Listener responses as a collaborative process: The role of gaze. International Communication Association, pages 566-580, 2002.
2. H. Brugman and A. Russel. Annotating multimedia/multi-modal resources with elan. In Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation, pages 2065-2068. Citeseer, 2004.
3. A. Cangelosi, G. Metta, G. Sagerer, S. Nolfi, C. Nehaniv, K. Fischer, J. Tani, T. Belpaeme, G. Sandini, F. Nori, et al. Integration of action and language knowledge: A roadmap for developmental robotics. Autonomous Mental Development, IEEE Transactions on, (99): 1, 2009.
4. E.V. Clark. Conventionality and contrast: Pragmatic principles with lexical consequences. 1992.
5. G. Csibra and G. Gergely. Social learning and social cognition: The case for pedagogy. Processes of change in brain and cognitive development. Attention and performance, 21, 2005.
6. G. Csibra and G. Gergely. Natural pedagogy. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 13(4):148-153, 2009.
7. A. Elins. Object-oriented software development.
8. B. Estigarribia and E.V. Clark. Getting and maintaining attention in talk to young children. Journal of child language, 34(04):799-814, 2007.
9. I. Fasel, G.O. Deák, J. Triesch, and J. Movellan. Combining embodied models and empirical research for understanding the development of shared attention, pages 21-27, 2002.
10. Kerstin Fischer. Interpersonal variation in understanding robots as social actors. In Proceedings of HRI'11, March 6-9th, 2011. Lausanne, Switzerland, pages 53-60, 2011.
11. A. Fogel and A. Garvey. Alive communication. Infant Behavior and Development, 30(2):251-257, 2007.
12. L.J. Gogate, L.H. Bolzani, and E.A. Betancourt. Attention to maternal multimodal naming by 6-to 8-month-old infants and learning of word-object relations. Infancy, 9(3):259-288, 2006.
13. H. Kato. Artoolkit. http://www.hitl.washington.edu/artoolkit/, 1999.
14. K. S. Lohan, S. Gieselmann, A. L. Vollmer, K Rohlfing, and B. Wrede. Does embodiment effect tutoring behavior? 2010.
15. M. Lohse, M. Hanheide, K. Pitsch, K.J. Rohlfing, and G. Sagerer. Improving hri design by applying systemic interaction analysis (sina). Interaction Studies, 10(3):298-323, 2009.
16. S. Machines, faceapi, 2009.
17. D.J. Matatyaho and L.J. Gogate. Type of maternal object motion during synchronous naming predicts preverbal infants' learning of word-object relations. Infancy, 13(2): 172-184, 2008.
18. Andrew N. Meltzoff, Rechele Brooks, Aaron P. Shon, and Rajesh P.N. Rao. "social" robots are psychological agents for infants: A test of gaze following. Neural Networks, 23:966-972, 2010.
19. G. Metta, P. Fitzpatrick, and L. Natale. Yarp: yet another robot platform. International Journal on Advanced Robotics Systems, 3(1):43-48, 2006.
20. K. Pitsch, H. Kuzuoka, Y. Suzuki, L. Sussenbach, P. Luff, and C. Heath. the first five seconds: Contingent stepwise entry into an interaction as a means to secure sustained engagement in hri. In Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2009. RO-MAN 2009. The 18th IEEE International Symposium on, pages 985-991. IEEE, 2009.
21. K. Pitsch, A.L. Vollmer, J. Fritsch, B. Wrede, K. Rohlfing, and G. Sagerer. On the loop of action modification and the recipient's gaze in adult-child interaction. In Gesture and Speech in Interaction, Poznan, Poland, 24/09/2009 2009.
22. H. Sacks. Lectures on conversation. Blackwell, 1995.
23. E.A. Schegloff. Sequence organization in interaction: A primer in conversation analysis I. Cambridge Univ Pr, 2007.
24. A. Senju and G. Csibra. Gaze following in human infants depends on communicative signals. Current Biology, 18(9):668-671, 2008.
25. J. Shotton, A. Fitzgibbon, M. Cook, T. Sharp, M. Finocchio, R. Moore, A. Kipman, and A. Blake. Real-time human pose recognition in parts from single depth images.
26. JS Watson. Contingency perception in early social development. Social perception in infants, pages 157-176, 1985.
27. S. Wrede, M. Hanheide, C. Bauckhage, and G. Sagerer. An active memory as a model for information fusion. In Proc. Int. Conf. on Information Fusion, volume 1, pages 198-205. Citeseer, 2004.
28. P. Zukow-Goldring and M.A. Arbib. Affordances, effectivities, and assisted imitation: Caregivers and the directing of attention. Neuro- computing, 70(13-15):2181-2193, 2007.