Versatile Demonstration Interface: Toward More Flexible Robot Demonstration Collection

Previous methods for Learning from Demonstration leverage several approaches for a human to teach motions to a robot, including teleoperation, kinesthetic teaching, and natural demonstrations. However, little previous work has explored more general interfaces that allow for multiple demonstration types. Given the varied preferences of human demonstrators and task characteristics, a flexible tool that enables multiple demonstration types could be crucial for broader robot skill training. In this work, we propose Versatile Demonstration Interface (VDI), an attachment for collaborative robots that simplifies the collection of three common types of demonstrations. Designed for flexible deployment in industrial settings, our tool requires no additional instrumentation of the environment. Our prototype interface captures human demonstrations through a combination of vision, force sensing, and state tracking (e.g., through the robot proprioception or AprilTag tracking). Through a user study where we deployed our prototype VDI at a local manufacturing innovation center with manufacturing experts, we demonstrated the efficacy of our prototype in representative industrial tasks. Interactions from our study exposed a range of industrial use cases for VDI, clear relationships between demonstration preferences and task criteria, and insights for future tool design.

Grounding Language Plans in Demonstrations Through Counterfactual Perturbations

Grounding the common-sense reasoning of Large Language Models in physical domains remains a pivotal yet unsolved problem for embodied AI. Whereas prior works have focused on leveraging LLMs directly for planning in symbolic spaces, this work uses LLMs to guide the search of task structures and constraints implicit in multi-step demonstrations. Specifically, we borrow from manipulation planning literature the concept of mode families, which group robot configurations by specific motion constraints, to serve as an abstraction layer between the high-level language representations of an LLM and the low-level physical trajectories of a robot. By replaying a few human demonstrations with synthetic perturbations, we generate coverage over the demonstrations' state space with additional successful executions as well as counterfactuals that fail the task. Our explanation-based learning framework trains an end-to-end differentiable neural network to predict successful trajectories from failures and as a by-product learns classifiers that ground low-level states and images in mode families without dense labeling. The learned grounding classifiers can further be used to translate language plans into reactive policies in the physical domain in an interpretable manner. We show our approach improves the interpretability and reactivity of imitation learning through 2D navigation and simulated and real robot manipulation tasks. Website: https://sites.google.com/view/grounding-plans

Understanding Entrainment in Human Groups: Optimising Human-Robot Collaboration from Lessons Learned during Human-Human Collaboration

Successful entrainment during collaboration positively affects trust, willingness to collaborate, and likeability towards collaborators. In this paper, we present a mixed-method study to investigate characteristics of successful entrainment leading to pair and group-based synchronisation. Drawing inspiration from industrial settings, we designed a fast-paced, short-cycle repetitive task. Using motion tracking, we investigated entrainment in both dyadic and triadic task completion. Furthermore, we utilise audio-video recordings and semi-structured interviews to contextualise participants' experiences. This paper contributes to the Human-Computer/Robot Interaction (HCI/HRI) literature using a human-centred approach to identify characteristics of entrainment during pair- and group-based collaboration. We present five characteristics related to successful entrainment. These are related to the occurrence of entrainment, leader-follower patterns, interpersonal communication, the importance of the point-of-assembly, and the value of acoustic feedback. Finally, we present three design considerations for future research and design on collaboration with robots.

Human-Guided Complexity-Controlled Abstractions

Neural networks often learn task-specific latent representations that fail to generalize to novel settings or tasks. Conversely, humans learn discrete representations (i.e., concepts or words) at a variety of abstraction levels (e.g., "bird" vs. "sparrow") and deploy the appropriate abstraction based on task. Inspired by this, we train neural models to generate a spectrum of discrete representations, and control the complexity of the representations (roughly, how many bits are allocated for encoding inputs) by tuning the entropy of the distribution over representations. In finetuning experiments, using only a small number of labeled examples for a new task, we show that (1) tuning the representation to a task-appropriate complexity level supports the highest finetuning performance, and (2) in a human-participant study, users were able to identify the appropriate complexity level for a downstream task using visualizations of discrete representations. Our results indicate a promising direction for rapid model finetuning by leveraging human insight.

An Information Bottleneck Characterization of the Understanding-Workload Tradeoff

Recent advances in artificial intelligence (AI) have underscored the need for explainable AI (XAI) to support human understanding of AI systems. Consideration of human factors that impact explanation efficacy, such as mental workload and human understanding, is central to effective XAI design. Existing work in XAI has demonstrated a tradeoff between understanding and workload induced by different types of explanations. Explaining complex concepts through abstractions (hand-crafted groupings of related problem features) has been shown to effectively address and balance this workload-understanding tradeoff. In this work, we characterize the workload-understanding balance via the Information Bottleneck method: an information-theoretic approach which automatically generates abstractions that maximize informativeness and minimize complexity. In particular, we establish empirical connections between workload and complexity and between understanding and informativeness through human-subject experiments. This empirical link between human factors and information-theoretic concepts provides an important mathematical characterization of the workload-understanding tradeoff which enables user-tailored XAI design.

Diagnosis, Feedback, Adaptation: A Human-in-the-Loop Framework for Test-Time Policy Adaptation

Policies often fail due to distribution shift -- changes in the state and reward that occur when a policy is deployed in new environments. Data augmentation can increase robustness by making the model invariant to task-irrelevant changes in the agent's observation. However, designers don't know which concepts are irrelevant a priori, especially when different end users have different preferences about how the task is performed. We propose an interactive framework to leverage feedback directly from the user to identify personalized task-irrelevant concepts. Our key idea is to generate counterfactual demonstrations that allow users to quickly identify possible task-relevant and irrelevant concepts. The knowledge of task-irrelevant concepts is then used to perform data augmentation and thus obtain a policy adapted to personalized user objectives. We present experiments validating our framework on discrete and continuous control tasks with real human users. Our method (1) enables users to better understand agent failure, (2) reduces the number of demonstrations required for fine-tuning, and (3) aligns the agent to individual user task preferences.

Towards Collaborative Plan Acquisition through Theory of Mind Modeling in Situated Dialogue

Collaborative tasks often begin with partial task knowledge and incomplete initial plans from each partner. To complete these tasks, agents need to engage in situated communication with their partners and coordinate their partial plans towards a complete plan to achieve a joint task goal. While such collaboration seems effortless in a human-human team, it is highly challenging for human-AI collaboration. To address this limitation, this paper takes a step towards collaborative plan acquisition, where humans and agents strive to learn and communicate with each other to acquire a complete plan for joint tasks. Specifically, we formulate a novel problem for agents to predict the missing task knowledge for themselves and for their partners based on rich perceptual and dialogue history. We extend a situated dialogue benchmark for symmetric collaborative tasks in a 3D blocks world and investigate computational strategies for plan acquisition. Our empirical results suggest that predicting the partner's missing knowledge is a more viable approach than predicting one's own. We show that explicit modeling of the partner's dialogue moves and mental states produces improved and more stable results than without. These results provide insight for future AI agents that can predict what knowledge their partner is missing and, therefore, can proactively communicate such information to help their partner acquire such missing knowledge toward a common understanding of joint tasks.

Aligning Robot and Human Representations

To act in the world, robots rely on a representation of salient task aspects: for example, to carry a cup of coffee, a robot must consider movement efficiency and cup orientation in its behaviour. However, if we want robots to act for and with people, their representations must not be just functional but also reflective of what humans care about, i.e. their representations must be aligned with humans'. In this survey, we pose that current reward and imitation learning approaches suffer from representation misalignment, where the robot's learned representation does not capture the human's representation. We suggest that because humans will be the ultimate evaluator of robot performance in the world, it is critical that we explicitly focus our efforts on aligning learned task representations with humans, in addition to learning the downstream task. We advocate that current representation learning approaches in robotics should be studied from the perspective of how well they accomplish the objective of representation alignment. To do so, we mathematically define the problem, identify its key desiderata, and situate current robot learning methods within this formalism. We conclude the survey by suggesting future directions for exploring open challenges.

Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030: The One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence

In September 2016, Stanford's "One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence" project (AI100) issued the first report of its planned long-term periodic assessment of artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on society. It was written by a panel of 17 study authors, each of whom is deeply rooted in AI research, chaired by Peter Stone of the University of Texas at Austin. The report, entitled "Artificial Intelligence and Life in 2030," examines eight domains of typical urban settings on which AI is likely to have impact over the coming years: transportation, home and service robots, healthcare, education, public safety and security, low-resource communities, employment and workplace, and entertainment. It aims to provide the general public with a scientifically and technologically accurate portrayal of the current state of AI and its potential and to help guide decisions in industry and governments, as well as to inform research and development in the field. The charge for this report was given to the panel by the AI100 Standing Committee, chaired by Barbara Grosz of Harvard University.

Gathering Strength, Gathering Storms: The One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence (AI100) 2021 Study Panel Report

In September 2021, the "One Hundred Year Study on Artificial Intelligence" project (AI100) issued the second report of its planned long-term periodic assessment of artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on society. It was written by a panel of 17 study authors, each of whom is deeply rooted in AI research, chaired by Michael Littman of Brown University. The report, entitled "Gathering Strength, Gathering Storms," answers a set of 14 questions probing critical areas of AI development addressing the major risks and dangers of AI, its effects on society, its public perception and the future of the field. The report concludes that AI has made a major leap from the lab to people's lives in recent years, which increases the urgency to understand its potential negative effects. The questions were developed by the AI100 Standing Committee, chaired by Peter Stone of the University of Texas at Austin, consisting of a group of AI leaders with expertise in computer science, sociology, ethics, economics, and other disciplines.