The PackBots being used by the U.S. military in Afghanistan and the urban search and rescue (USAR) robots that worked the World Trade Center site are just two recent examples of mobile robots moving from the laboratory to the field. What is significant about these new applications is that they invariably involve some form of human-robot interaction (HRI) rather than the full robot autonomy that has motivated most prior research. Conducting HRI research can be extremely difficult because experimentation with physical robots is expensive and time consuming. Few roboticists have experience or interest in conducting human experimentation, and researchers in human factors or human-computer interaction often lack experience in programming robots or access to robotic platforms. In this paper, we describe a high-fidelity, open-source simulation intended for HRI researchers of varying backgrounds and provide reference tasks and environments to facilitate collaboration in order to share the results. The architecture and capabilities of the game engine–based USARSim simulation are described. Its use for HRI research is illustrated through case studies describing experiments in camera control for remote viewing and integrated display of attitude information.
AdamsJ. (1995). Human management of a hierarchical system for the control of multiple mobile robots. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
3.
AliK. (1999). Multiagent telerobotics: Matching systems to tasks, Ph.D. dissertation, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA.
4.
BestB.LebiereC.ScarpinattoC. (2002). Modeling synthetic opponents in MOUT training simulations using the ACT-R cognitive architecture. Eleventh Conference on Computer Generated Forces and Behavior Representation, Orlando: Institute for Simulation and Training, University of Central Florida.
5.
BowmanD.KollerD.HodgesL. (1997). Travel in immersive virtual environments: An evaluation of viewpoint motion control techniques. Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium (pp. 45–52). Albuquerque, NM: IEEE.
6.
BurkeJ.MurphyR.CoovertM. (2004). Moonlight in Miami: An ethnographic study of human-robot interaction in the context of an urban search and rescue disaster response training exercise. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 19, 85–116.
7.
CarpinS.BirkA.LewisM.WangJ.JacoffA. (2005). High fidelity tools for rescue robotics: Results and perspectives. Robocup 2005: Robot Soccer World Cup IX, Springer, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg.
8.
CarpinS.StoyanovT.NevatiaY.LewisM.WangJ. (2006). Quantitative assessments of USARSim accuracy. CD of theProceedings of PerMIS 2006.
9.
CasperJ. L. (2002). Human-robot interactions during the robot-assisted urban search and rescue response at the World Trade Center, Masters' thesis, University of Southern Florida, Tampa, FL.
10.
ChadwickR.GillanD.SimonD.PazuchanicsS. (2004). Cognitive analysis methods for control of multiple robots: Robotics on 5 a day. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting (pp. 688–692). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
11.
CrandallJ.GoodrichM.OlsenD.NielsenC. (2005). Validating human-robot interaction schemes in multi-tasking environments. Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics—Part A: 35(4), Special Issue on Human-Robot Interaction.
12.
DarkenR.KempsterK.PetersonB. (2001). Effects of streaming video quality of service on spatial comprehension in a reconnaissance task. CD of theProceedings of the Meeting of I/ITSEC, St. Petersburg, FL, distributed by NTSA, Arlington, VA.
13.
DoraisG.BonassoR.KortenkampD.PellB.SchrekenghostD. (1999). Adjustable autonomy for human-centered autonomous systems on Mars. Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Agents with Adjustable Autonomy, Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
14.
DruryJ.ScholtzJ.YancoH. (2003). Awareness in human-robot interactions. IEEE Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (pp. 912–918). Washington DC: IEEE.
15.
EndoY.MacKenzieD.ArkinR. (2004). Usability evaluation of high-level user assistance for robot mission specification. Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part C, 34(2), 168–180.
16.
FongT. (2001). Collaborative control: A robot-centric model for vehicle teleoperation. Ph.D. dissertation, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA.
GerkeyB.VaughanR.HowardA. (2003). The Player/Stage project: Tools for multi-robot and distributed sensor systems. Proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Robotics (ICAR 2003) (pp. 317–323). University of Coimbra, Portugal IEE.
HughesS.LewisM. (2004). Robotic camera control for remote exploration. ACM CHI 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 511–517). Vienna, Austria: ACM.
21.
JacobsonJ.LewisM. (2005). Game engine virtual reality with CaveUT. Computer, 38(4), 79–82.
22.
JacoffA.MessinaE.EvansJ. (2001). Experiences in Deploying Test Arenas for Autonomous Mobile Robots, CD ofProceedings of the 2001 Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems (PerMIS) Workshop, in association with IEEE CCA and ISIC, Mexico City, Mexico, Sept. 4, 2001.
23.
JohnsonL.MarsellaS.MoteN.ViljhalmssonH.NarayananS.ChoiS. (2004). Tactical language training system: Supporting the rapid acquisition of foreign language and cultural skills. Proceedings of InSTIL/ICALL2004. http://sisley.cgm.unive.it/ICALL2004/papers/005Johnson.pdf. Accessed January 8, 2007.
24.
KonoligeK.MyersK. (1996). The Saphira architecture for autonomous mobile robots. In KortenkampD.BonassoR. P.MurphyR. (Eds.), AI-based mobile robots: Case studies of successful robot systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25.
LeeP.RuspiniD.KhatibO. (1994). Dynamic simulation of interactive robotic environment. International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 1147–1152). San Diego, CA: IEE.
26.
LewisM.JacobsonJ. (2002). Game engines in research. Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 45, 27–48.
27.
MagerkoB.LairdJ.AssanieM.KerfootA.StokesD. (2004). AI characters and directors for interactive computer games. CD ofProceedings of the 2004 Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press.
28.
McGovernD. (1991). Teleoperation of land vehicles. In EllisS. (Ed.), Pictorial communications in virtual and real environments (pp. 182–195). New York: Taylor & Francis.
29.
MillerC.ParasuramanR. (2003). Beyond levels of automation: An architecture for more flexible human-automation collaboration. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 47th Annual Meeting (pp. 182–186). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
30.
MurphyR. (2003). Gaps in rescue robotics. CD IEEE Workshop on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics. Tampa, FL.
31.
MurphyR. (2004). Human-robot interaction in rescue robotics. Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part C: Applications and Reviews, 34(2), 138–153.
32.
NickersonJ.SkienaS. (2005). Attention and communication: Decision scenarios for teleoperating robots. Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences. Waikaloa, HI: IEEE.
33.
NielsenC.RicksB.GoodrichM.BruemmerD.FewD.WaltonM. (2004). Snapshots for semantic maps. Proceedings of the 2004 IEEE Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. Hague, Netherlands: IEEE.
34.
NodaI.SuzukiS.MatsubaraH.AsadaM.KitanoK. (1998). Robocup 97: The first world cup soccer games and conferences. AI Magazine, 19(3), 49–59.
35.
OlsenD.Jr.WoodS. (2004). Fan-out: Measuring human control of multiple robots. Proceedings of ACM CHI 2004 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 231–238). Vienna, Austria: ACM.
36.
ParasuramanR.GalsterS.SquireP.FurukawaH.MillerC. (2005). A flexible delegation-type interface enhances system performance in human supervision of multiple robots: Empirical studies with RoboFlag. IEEE Transactions of Systems Man and Cybernetics Part A, 35(4), 481–493.
37.
ParkerL. (1995). Heterogeneous multi-robot cooperation. Ph.D. dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA.
38.
PrasithsangareeP.ManojlovichJ.HughesS.LewisM. (2004). UTSAF: A multi-agent-based software bridge for interoperability between distributed military and commercial gaming simulation, Simulation, 80(12), 647–657.
39.
RicksB.NielsenC.GoodrichM. (2004). Ecological displays for robot interaction: A new perspective. Proceedings of IROS 2004. Sendai, Japan: IEEE.
40.
ScerriP.LiaoE.GuorningL.SycaraK.YangX.LewisM. (2004). Coordinating very large groups of wide area search munitions. In GrundelD.MurpheyR.PardalasP. (Eds.), Theory and algorithms for cooperative systems. Singapore: World Scientific.
41.
SheridanT. B. (1992). Telerobotics, automation and human supervisory control. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42.
TittleJ.RoeslerA.WoodsD. (2002). The remote perception problem. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 46th Annual Meeting (pp. 260–264). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
43.
WangJ.LewisM.GennariJ. (2003). USAR: A game-based simulation for teleoperation. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 47th Annual Meeting (pp. 493–497). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
44.
WangJ.LewisM.HughesS. (2004). Gravity-referenced attitude display for teleoperation of mobile robots. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 48th Annual Meeting (pp. 2662–2666). Santa Monica, CA: SAGE Publications.
45.
WoodsD.TittleJ.FeilM.RoeslerA. (2004). Envisioning human-robot coordination in future operations. Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Part C: Applications and Reviews, 34(2), 210–218.
46.
YancoH.DruryJ.ScholtzJ. (2004). Beyond usability evaluation: Analysis of human-robot interaction at a major robotics competition. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction, 19(1–2), 117–149.
47.
ZarattiM.FratarcangeliM.IocchiL. (2006). A 3D simulator of multiple legged robots based on USARSim. CD fromRobocup 2006: Robot Soccer World Cup X, Springer, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence. Bremen, Germany: Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg.
