The Effects of an Impolite vs. a Polite Robot Playing Rock-Paper-Scissors

Castro‐González, Álvaro; Castillo, José Carlos; Alonso-Martín, Fernándo; Olortegui-Ortega, Olmer V.; González-Pacheco, Víctor; Malfáz, María; Salichs, Miguel Á.

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47437-3_30

Cited by 26 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…For the embodiment comparative, we have used our three social robots, built at the RoboticsLab from Universidad Carlos III of Madrid (Spain). These robots are: Maggie [34,35] (Figure 1), Mini [36] ( Figure 2), and Mbot [37] (Figure 3). The robots integrate a dialog mechanism to enable natural HRI.…”

Section: The Social Robotsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Four-Features Evaluation of Text to Speech Systems for Three Social Robots

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The success of social robotics is directly linked to their ability of interacting with people. Humans possess verbal and non-verbal communication skills, and, therefore, both are essential for social robots to get a natural human–robot interaction. This work focuses on the first of them since the majority of social robots implement an interaction system endowed with verbal capacities. In order to do this implementation, we must equip social robots with an artificial voice system. In robotics, a Text to Speech (TTS) system is the most common speech synthesizer technique. The performance of a speech synthesizer is mainly evaluated by its similarity to the human voice in relation to its intelligibility and expressiveness. In this paper, we present a comparative study of eight off-the-shelf TTS systems used in social robots. In order to carry out the study, 125 participants evaluated the performance of the following TTS systems: Google, Microsoft, Ivona, Loquendo, Espeak, Pico, AT&T, and Nuance. The evaluation was performed after observing videos where a social robot communicates verbally using one TTS system. The participants completed a questionnaire to rate each TTS system in relation to four features: intelligibility, expressiveness, artificiality, and suitability. In this study, four research questions were posed to determine whether it is possible to present a ranking of TTS systems in relation to each evaluated feature, or, on the contrary, there are no significant differences between them. Our study shows that participants found differences between the TTS systems evaluated in terms of intelligibility, expressiveness, and artificiality. The experiments also indicated that there was a relationship between the physical appearance of the robots (embodiment) and the suitability of TTS systems.

show abstract

Section: The Social Robotsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Four-Features Evaluation of Text to Speech Systems for Three Social Robots

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Las plataformas para las que se ha desarrollado la aplicación son: por un lado el robot Maggie [16], que cuenta con una pantalla táctil instalada en el pecho; el robot Mbot [17], equipado nuevamente con una pantalla táctil; y finalmente el robot Mini [18], donde el interfaz táctil es una tableta de 10 con sistema operativo Android (ver figura 2).…”

Section: Ejemplo Prácticounclassified

Interfaces táctiles para Interacción Humano-Robot

Villaroya¹,

Castillo²,

Alonso-Martín³

et al. 2020

XXXVIII Jornadas De Automática: Gijón, 6, 7, Y 8 De Septiembre De 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…El primero de ellos, el robot Maggie [13], es el más antiguo de los tres y su principal objetivo ha sido interaccionar con niños de entre 4 a 14 años. El robot Mini [14] sirve como plataforma de investigación en interacciones con ancianos con problemas cognitivos. Por último el robot Mbot [15], desarrollado durante el proyecto MO-narCH 2 , se ha destinado a la interacción con niños en la planta pediátrica del hospital oncológico de Lisboa (ver figura 1).…”

Section: Los Robots Socialesunclassified

“…Para ello se suele emplear técnicas basadas en el análisis del esqueleto del usuario en secuencias de imágenes continuas [19]. Asimismo, dispositivos como el LeapMotion proporcionan información acerca de los movimientos de las manos a través de técnicas de clasificación, que se pueden explotar para interacción [20].…”

Section: Módulos Desarrollados Para Percibir El Entornounclassified