Autonomous swarm algorithms have been studied extensively in the past several years. However, there is little research on the effect of injecting human influence into a robot swarm-whether it be to update the swarm's current goals or reshape swarm behavior. While there has been growing research in the field of human-swarm interaction (HSI), no previous studies have investigated how humans interact with swarms under communication latency. We investigate the effects of latency both with and without a predictive display in a basic swarm foraging task to see if such a display can help mitigate the effects of delayed feedback of the swarm state. Furthermore, we introduce a new concept called neglect benevolence to represent how a human operator may need to give time for swarm algorithms to stabilize before issuing new commands, and we investigate it with respect to task performance. Our study shows that latency did affect a user's ability to control a swarm to find targets in the foraging task, and that the predictive display helped to remove these effects. We also found evidence for neglect benevolence, and that operators exploited neglect benevolence in different ways, leading to two different, but equally successful strategies in the target-searching task.

In this paper we present the first study of human-swarm interaction comparing two fundamental types of interaction, coined intermittent and environmental. These types are exemplified by two control methods, selection and beacon control, made available to a human operator to control a foraging swarm of robots. Selection and beacon control differ with respect to their temporal and spatial influence on the swarm and enable an operator to generate different strategies from the basic behaviors of the swarm. Selection control requires an active selection of groups of robots while beacon control exerts an influence on nearby robots within a set range. Both control methods are implemented in a testbed in which operators solve an information foraging problem by utilizing a set of swarm behaviors. The robotic swarm has only local communication and sensing capabilities. The number of robots in the swarm range from 50 to 200. Operator performance for each control method is compared in a series of missions in different environments with no obstacles up to cluttered and structured obstacles. In addition, performance is compared to simple and advanced autonomous swarms. Thirty-two participants were recruited for participation in the study. Autonomous swarm algorithms were tested in repeated simulations. Our results showed that selection control scales better to larger swarms and generally outperforms beacon control. Operators utilized different swarm behaviors with different frequency across control methods, suggesting an adaptation to different strategies induced by choice of control method. Simple autonomous swarms outperformed human operators in open environments, but operators adapted better to complex environments with obstacles. Human controlled swarms fell short of task-specific benchmarks under all conditions. Our results reinforce the importance of understanding and choosing appropriate types of human-swarm interaction when designing swarm systems, in addition to choosing appropriate swarm behaviors.

In this paper we investigate principles of swarm control that enable a human operator to exert influence on and control large swarms of robots. We present two principles, coined selection and beacon control, that differ with respect to their temporal and spatial persistence. The former requires active selection of groups of robots while the latter exerts a passive influence on nearby robots. Both principles are implemented in a testbed in which operators exert influence on a robot swarm by switching between a set of behaviors ranging from trivial behaviors up to distributed autonomous algorithms. Performance is tested in a series of complex foraging tasks in environments with different obstacles ranging from open to cluttered and structured. The robotic swarm has only local communication and sensing capabilities with the number of robots ranging from 50 to 200. Experiments with human operators utilizing either selection or beacon control are compared with each other and to a simple autonomous swarm with regard to performance, adaptation to complex environments, and scalability to larger swarms. Our results show superior performance of autonomous swarms in open environments, of selection control in complex environments, and indicate a potential for scaling beacon control to larger swarms.

No abstract

Autonomous swarm algorithms and human-robot interaction (HRI) have both attracted increasing attention from researchers in recent years. However, HRI has rarely extended beyond single robots or small multi-robot teams. While one of the benefits of robot swarms is their robust capabilities and the ability of their distributed algorithms to deal autonomously with the complex interactions amongst swarm members, there is undoubtedly a need for humans to influence such swarms in some circumstances-especially when these swarms are operating in unknown or hostile environments. In this paper, we approach the problem of human-swarm interaction (HSI) using previous research in levels of automation (LOAs) in HRI. We create a target searching task whereby the swarm can operate at two different levels of autonomy: an autonomous dispersion algorithm, or user-defined goto points. We investigate what environmental conditions are conducive to different amounts of human influence, and at what point further human intervention has a detrimental effect on the swarm's performance. The results show that for complex environments containing numerous obstacles and small passageways, there is indeed a need for some human influence; however, after a certain point, further influence causes performance degradation.