Towards a platform-independent cooperative human-robot interaction system: II. Perception, execution and imitation of goal directed actions

IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems

Volumn , Issue , 2011, Pages 2895-2902

  Lallée, Stephane ^a   Pattacini, Ugo ^d   Boucher, Jean David ^a   Lemaignan, Séverin ^b   Lenz, Alexander ^c   Melhuish, Chris ^c   Natale, Lorenzo ^d   Skachek, Sergey ^c   Hamann, Katharina ^e   Steinwender, Jasmin ^e   Sisbot, Emrah Akin ^b   Metta, Giorgio ^d   Alami, Rachid ^b   Warnier, Matthieu ^g   Guitton, Julien ^g   Warneken, Felix ^f   Dominey, Peter Ford ^a  

^a STEM CELL AND BRAIN RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (France)

^b LAAS CNRS   (France)

^c BRISTOL ROBOTICS LABORATORY   (United Kingdom)

^d ISTITUTO ITALIANO DI TECNOLOGIA   (Italy)

^e MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE   (Germany)

^f HARVARD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^g NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ABSTRACTION LAYER; ACTION EXECUTION; DEVELOPMENTAL RESEARCH; GOAL DIRECTED; HUMAN ACTIONS; HUMAN MOTIONS; HUMAN UNDERSTANDING; INTERACTION SYSTEMS; MOTION CAPTURE SYSTEM; MOTOR PRIMITIVES; PERCEPTION OF ACTION; PERCEPTUAL SYSTEM; PHYSICAL STATE; PLATFORM INDEPENDENCE; PLATFORM INDEPENDENT; ROBOTIC PLATFORMS; SPOKEN LANGUAGE UNDERSTANDING; TOULOUSE; VISUAL PERCEPTION;

ABSTRACTING; EXPERIMENTS; INTELLIGENT ROBOTS; MOTION ESTIMATION; ROBOTICS; SPEECH RECOGNITION;

HUMAN ROBOT INTERACTION;

EID: 84455175496     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: 10.1109/IROS.2011.6048351     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (45)

1. Lallée, S., et al. Towards a Platform-Independent Cooperative Human-Robot Interaction System: I. Perception. in IROS. 2010. Taipei.
2. Hommel, B., et al., The theory of event coding (TEC): A framework for perception and action planning. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 2001. 24(05): p. 849-878. (Pubitemid 34965924)
3. Rizzolatti, G. and L. Craighero, The mirror-neuron system. Annu. Rev. Neurosci., 2004. 27: p. 169-192. (Pubitemid 39050401)
4. Király, I., et al., The early origins of goal attribution in infancy. Consciousness and Cognition, 2003. 12(4): p. 752-769. (Pubitemid 37491361)
5. Dominey, P. and F. Warneken, The basis of shared intentions in human and robot cognition. New Ideas in Psychology, 2009: p. (in press).
6. Lallée, S., F. Warneken, and P. Dominey. Learning to collaborate by observation. in Epirob. 2009. Venice.
7. Csibra, G., et al., Goal attribution without agency cues: the perception of [] pure reason'in infancy. Cognition, 1999. 72(3): p. 237-267. (Pubitemid 29462583)
8. Alissandrakis, A., C.L. Nehaniv, and K. Dautenhahn, Imitation with ALICE: Learning to imitate corresponding actions across dissimilar embodiments. Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, IEEE Transactions on, 2002. 32(4): p. 482-496.
9. Argall, B., et al., A survey of robot learning from demonstration. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2009. 57(5): p. 469-483.
10. Calinon, S., F. Guenter, and A. Billard. Goal-directed imitation in a humanoid robot. in ICRA. 2005. Barcelona: IEEE.
11. Demiris, Y. and M. Johnson, Distributed, predictive perception of actions: a biologically inspired robotics architecture for imitation and learning. Connection Science, 2003. 15(4): p. 231-243. (Pubitemid 38474542)
12. Dillmann, R., Teaching and learning of robot tasks via observation of human performance. Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 2004. 47(2-3): p. 109-116.
13. Woodward, A.L., Infants selectively encode the goal object of an actor's reach. Cognition, 1998. 69(1): p. 1-34. (Pubitemid 128446652)
14. Woodward, A.L., Infants' ability to distinguish between purposeful and non-purposeful behaviors. Infant Behavior and Development, 1999. 22(2): p. 145-160.
15. Woodward, A.L., J.A. Sommerville, and J.J. Guajardo, How infants make sense of intentional action. Intentions and intentionality: Foundations of social cognition, 2001: p. 149-169.
16. Kamewari, K., et al., Six-and-a-half-month-old children positively attribute goals to human action and to humanoid-robot motion. Cognitive Development, 2005. 20(2): p. 303-320. (Pubitemid 40945815)
17. Mandler, J., ed. Preverbal representation and language. Language and space. 1996, MIT Press. 365-384.
18. Talmy, L., Force dynamics in language and cognition. Cognitive science, 1988. 12(1): p. 49-100.
19. Kotovsky, L. and R. Baillargeon, The development of calibration-based reasoning about collision events in young infants. Cognition, 1998. 67(3): p. 311-351. (Pubitemid 128403691)
20. Metta, G., et al. The iCub humanoid robot: an open platform for research in embodied cognition. in PerMIS: Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems Workshop. 2008. Washington DC, USA.
21. Baillargeon Elizabeth, S., Object permanence in five-month-old infants*1. Cognition, 1985. 20(3): p. 191-208.
22. Mandler, J.M., How to build a baby: II. Conceptual primitives. PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW-NEW YORK-, 1992. 99: p. 587-587.
23. Roy, D., Semiotic schemas: A framework for grounding language in action and perception. Artificial Intelligence, 2005. 167(1-2): p. 170-205. (Pubitemid 41240681)
24. Siskind, J.M. Visual event perception. in NEC Research Symposium. 1998.
25. Spelke, E.S., et al., Origins of knowledge. PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW-NEW YORK-, 1992. 99: p. 605-605.
26. Dominey, P. and J. Boucher, Learning to talk about events from narrated video in a construction grammar framework. Artificial Intelligence, 2005. 167(1-2): p. 31-61. (Pubitemid 41240677)
27. Dominey, P. and J. Boucher, Developmental stages of perception and language acquisition in a perceptually grounded robot. Cognitive Systems Research, 2005. 6: p. 243-259. (Pubitemid 40712029)
28. Mussa-Ivaldi, F.A., S.F. Giszter, and E. Bizzi, Linear combinations of primitives in vertebrate motor control. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 1994. 91(16): p. 7534.
29. Mataric, M.J., et al. Behavior-based primitives for articulated control. in Fifth international conference on simulation of adaptive behavior on From animals to animats 5. 1998.
30. Williamson, M.M. Postural primitives: Interactive behavior for a humanoid robot arm. in Fourth international conference on simulation of adaptive behavior on From animals to animats 4. 1996.
31. Thomas, U., et al. Error-tolerant execution of complex robot tasks based on skill primitives. in ICRA. 2003. Taipei: IEEE.
32. Morrow, J.D. and P. Khosla. Manipulation task primitives for composing robot skills. in ICRA. 2002. Albuquerque: IEEE.
33. Sentis, L. and O. Khatib, Synthesis of whole-body behaviors through hierarchical control of behavioral primitives. International Journal of Humanoid Robotics, 2005. 2(4): p. 505-518.
34. Firby, R.J. Building symbolic primitives with continuous control routines. in First international conference on Artificial intelligence planning systems 1992.
35. Paine, R.W. and J. Tani, Motor primitive and sequence self-organization in a hierarchical recurrent neural network. Neural Networks, 2004. 17(8-9): p. 1291-1309. (Pubitemid 39539543)
36. Mussa-Ivaldi, F. and E. Bizzi, Motor learning through the combination of primitives. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 2000. 355(1404): p. 1755.
37. Lallée, S., et al., Linking language with embodied teleological representations of action for humanoid cognition. Frontiers in Neurobotics, 2010.
38. Sutton, S., et al. Universal speech tools: The CSLU toolkit. in Fifth International Conference on Spoken Language Processing. 1998.
39. Song, H., R. Baillargeon, and C. Fisher, Can infants attribute to an agent a disposition to perform a particular action? Cognition, 2005. 98(2): p. B45-B55. (Pubitemid 41667073)
40. Johnson, M. and Y. Demiris. Hierarchies of coupled inverse and forward models for abstraction in robot action planning, recognition and imitation. in AISB. 2005.
41. Metta, G., et al., Understanding mirror neurons: a bio-robotic approach. Interaction studies, 2006. 7(2): p. 197-232.
42. Nehaniv, C.L. and K. Dautenhahn, 2 The Correspondence Problem. Imitation in animals and artifacts, 2002: p. 41.
43. Gergely, G. and G. Csibra, Teleological reasoning in infancy: the na ve theory of rational action. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2003. 7(7): p. 287-292. (Pubitemid 36818921)
44. Gergely, G., What should a robot learn from an infant? Mechanisms of action interpretation and observational learning in infancy. Connection Science, 2003. 15(4): p. 191-209. (Pubitemid 38474540)
45. Pattacini, U., et al. An Experimental Evaluation of a Novel Minimum-Jerk Cartesian Controller for Humanoid Robots. in IROS. 2010. Taipei.