Talk:Human-robot interaction
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Article Ratings
In the editor's mind, this article is a stub. It has a collection of interesting links, but really needs to be fleshed out before it would be a truly accurate reference. A good place to start would be to take some survey papers such as the following:
- T. Fong and I. Nourbakhsh and K. Dautenhahn. A Survey of Socially Interactive Robots. Robotics and Autonomous Systems. 42. (3-4). 143-166. 2003.
- P. H. Kahn and H. Ishiguro and B. Friedman and T. Kanda. What is a Human? -- Toward Psychological Benchmarks in the Field of Human-Robot Interaction. IEEE Proceedings of the International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN). Hatfield, UK. Sep. 2006.
- Scholtz, J.. Evaluation methods for human-system performance of intelligent systems.. Proceedings of the 2002 Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems (PerMIS) Workshop. Gaithersburg, MD. 2002.
- Holly Yanco and Jill L. Durry. A Taxonomy for Human-Robot Interaction. AAAI Fall Symposium on Human-Robot Interaction, AAAI Technical Report FS-02-03. Falmouth, Massachusetts. November. 2002.
And to add their content to the pages. Appropriate topics could be: methods for sensing and perceiving the social world; benchmarks and evaluation techniques for human-robot interaction; socially assistive robotics and other applications for robotics; robotics and its role in education (both robot teachers and robots as the focus of a class); robots and humans working as a team; rescue robotics (and tele-operation in general); and legal and ethical standards for robots in a modern world.
Some prominent human-robot interaction platforms that should be referenced include:
- Paro
- Robovie (ATR)
- Cog (MIT)
- Kismet (MIT)
- Robonaut (NASA)
- ASIMO (Honda)
- Valerie (CMU) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DaveFS (talk • contribs) 05:56, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Improving the article
In an article that will rely heavily on academic sources, it's a good idea to look for academics who pass 3 tests: they seem to know what they're talking about, they believe in citing important, relevant, and well-cited sources, and they make as many papers available online as they can. http://bartneck.de seems to me to be one example, although this isn't my field. If you want to mention more of their papers as a source, check http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=c+bartneck&hl=en&lr=&btnG=Search and, generally, select only those papers that have been cited a lot themselves. - Dan Dank55 (talk) 17:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)