Mapping Safe Zones for Co-located Human-UAV Interaction
Authors: 
Ayodeji Opeyemi Abioye, Lisa Bidgood, Sarvapali D. Ramchurn, Mohammad Divband SooratiAuthors Info & Claims
Ayodeji Opeyemi Abioye, Lisa Bidgood, Sarvapali D. Ramchurn, Mohammad Divband SooratiAuthors Info & ClaimsArticle No.: 1, Pages 1 - 10
Abstract
Recent advances in robotics bring us closer to the reality of living, co-habiting, and sharing personal spaces with robots. However, it is not clear how close a co-located robot can be to a human in a shared environment without making the human uncomfortable or anxious. This research aims to map safe and comfortable zones for co-located aerial robots. The objective is to identify the distances at which a drone causes discomfort to a co-located human and to create a map showing no-fly, moderate-fly, and safe-fly zones. We recruited a total of 18 participants and conducted two indoor laboratory experiments, one with a single drone and the other set with two drones. Our results show that multiple drones cause more discomfort when close to a co-located human than a single drone. We observed that distances below 200 cm caused discomfort, the moderate fly zone was 200 - 300 cm, and the safe-fly zone was any distance greater than 300 cm in single drone experiments. The safe zones were pushed further away by 100 cm for the multiple drone experiments. In this paper, we present the preliminary findings on safe-fly zones for multiple drones. Further work would investigate the impact of a higher number of aerial robots, the speed of approach, direction of travel, and noise level on co-located humans, and autonomously develop 3D models of trust zones and safe zones for co-located aerial swarms.
References
[1]
Ayodeji Opeyemi Abioye, Stephen D. Prior, Peter Saddington, and Sarvapali D. Ramchurn. 2022. The performance and cognitive workload analysis of a multimodal speech and visual gesture (mSVG) UAV control interface. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 147 (2022), 103915. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2021.103915
[2]
Ayodeji Opeyemi Abioye, Stephen D Prior, Glyn T Thomas, Peter Saddington, and Sarvapali D Ramchurn. 2019. Multimodal human aerobotic interaction. In Unmanned Aerial Vehicles: Breakthroughs in Research and Practice. IGI Global, 142–165. https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-8365-3.ch006
[3]
Urja Acharya, Alisha Bevins, and Brittany A. Duncan. 2017. Investigation of human-robot comfort with a small Unmanned Aerial Vehicle compared to a ground robot. In 2017 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). 2758–2765. https://doi.org/10.1109/IROS.2017.8206104
[4]
Robin Bretin, Mohamed Khamis, and Emily Cross. 2023. “Do I Run Away?”: Proximity, Stress and Discomfort in Human-Drone Interaction in Real and Virtual Environments. In Human-Computer Interaction – INTERACT 2023, José Abdelnour Nocera, Marta Kristín Lárusdóttir, Helen Petrie, Antonio Piccinno, and Marco Winckler (Eds.). Vol. 14143. Springer Nature Switzerland, Cham, 525–551. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-42283-6_29 Series Title: Lecture Notes in Computer Science.
[5]
Jessica R. Cauchard, Jane L. E, Kevin Y. Zhai, and James A. Landay. 2015. Drone & me: an exploration into natural human-drone interaction. In Proceedings of the 2015 ACM International Joint Conference on Pervasive and Ubiquitous Computing (Osaka, Japan) (UbiComp ’15). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 361–365. https://doi.org/10.1145/2750858.2805823
[6]
Jessica R. Cauchard, Alex Tamkin, Cheng Yao Wang, Luke Vink, Michelle Park, Tommy Fang, and James A. Landay. 2019. Drone.io: A Gestural and Visual Interface for Human-Drone Interaction. In 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). 153–162. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2019.8673011
[7]
Victoria Chang, Pramod Chundury, and Marshini Chetty. 2017. Spiders in the Sky: User Perceptions of Drones, Privacy, and Security. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, Denver Colorado USA, 6765–6776. https://doi.org/10.1145/3025453.3025632
[8]
Brittany A. Duncan and Robin R. Murphy. 2012. A preliminary model for comfortable approach distance based on environmental conditions and personal factors. In 2012 International Conference on Collaboration Technologies and Systems (CTS). 622–627. https://doi.org/10.1109/CTS.2012.6261117
[9]
Brittany A. Duncan and Robin R. Murphy. 2013. Comfortable approach distance with small Unmanned Aerial Vehicles. In 2013 IEEE RO-MAN. 786–792. https://doi.org/10.1109/ROMAN.2013.6628409
[10]
Edward T. Hall. 1990. The hidden dimension. Anchor Books.
[11]
Keith R. MacArthur, Kimberly Stowers, and P. A. Hancock. 2017. Human-Robot Interaction: Proximity and Speed—Slowly Back Away from the Robot!. In Advances in Human Factors in Robots and Unmanned Systems, Pamela Savage-Knepshield and Jessie Chen (Eds.). Springer International Publishing, Cham, 365–374.
[12]
Geison Pires Mesquita, Margarita Mulero-Pázmány, Serge A. Wich, and José Domingo Rodríguez-Teijeiro. 2022. Terrestrial Megafauna Response to Drone Noise Levels in Ex Situ Areas. Drones 6, 11 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/drones6110333
[13]
Jonathan Mumm and Bilge Mutlu. 2011. Human-robot proxemics: physical and psychological distancing in human-robot interaction. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (Lausanne, Switzerland) (HRI ’11). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 331–338. https://doi.org/10.1145/1957656.1957786
[14]
Katie J. Parnell, Joel E. Fischer, Jediah R. Clark, Adrian Bodenmann, Maria Jose Galvez Trigo, Mario P. Brito, Mohammad Divband Soorati, Katherine L. Plant, and Sarvapali D. Ramchurn. 2023. Trustworthy UAV Relationships: Applying the Schema Action World Taxonomy to UAVs and UAV Swarm Operations. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction 39, 20 (Dec. 2023), 4042–4058. https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2022.2108961
[15]
Carlos Ramos-Romero, Nathan Green, Seth Roberts, Charlotte Clark, and Antonio J. Torija. 2022. Requirements for Drone Operations to Minimise Community Noise Impact. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 19, 15 (2022). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19159299
[16]
Vincent Raoult, Andrew P Colefax, Blake M. Allan, Daniele Cagnazzi, Nataly Castelblanco-Martínez, Daniel Ierodiaconou, David W. Johnston, Sarah Landeo-Yauri, Mitchell Lyons, Vanessa Pirotta, Gail Schofield, and Paul A Butcher. 2020. Operational Protocols for the Use of Drones in Marine Animal Research. Drones 4, 4 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/drones4040064
[17]
Mohammad D. Soorati, Mohammad Naiseh, William Hunt, Katie Parnell, Jediah Clark, and Sarvapali D. Ramchurn. 2024. 7 - Enabling trustworthiness in human-swarm systems through a digital twin. In Putting AI in the Critical Loop, Prithviraj Dasgupta, James Llinas, Tony Gillespie, Scott Fouse, William Lawless, Ranjeev Mittu, and Donald Sofge (Eds.). Academic Press, 93–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-15988-6.00008-X
[18]
Anna Wojciechowska, Jeremy Frey, Sarit Sass, Roy Shafir, and Jessica R. Cauchard. 2019. Collocated Human-Drone Interaction: Methodology and Approach Strategy. In 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI). IEEE, Daegu, Korea (South), 172–181. https://doi.org/10.1109/HRI.2019.8673127
[19]
Hyung-Jin Yoon, Christopher Widdowson, Thiago Marinho, Ranxiao Frances Wang, and Naira Hovakimyan. 2019. Socially Aware Path Planning for a Flying Robot in Close Proximity of Humans. ACM Trans. Cyber-Phys. Syst. 3, 4, Article 41 (sep 2019), 24 pages. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341570
Index Terms
- Mapping Safe Zones for Co-located Human-UAV Interaction
Recommendations
Flying Frustum: A Spatial Interface for Enhancing Human-UAV Awareness
HAI '15: Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Human-Agent InteractionWe present Flying Frustum, a 3D spatial interface that enables control of semi-autonomous UAVs (Unmanned Aerial Vehicles) using pen interaction on a physical model of the terrain, and that spatially situates the information streaming from the UAVs onto ...
Ground Control Station Development for Autonomous UAV
Intelligent Robotics and ApplicationsAbstractUnmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) has typically been used in civil and military field all over the world. Based on the UAV mission of autonomous flight, the ground control station (GCS) including hardware and software become important equipment to be ...
Safety, Security, and Rescue Missions with an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV)
Several missions with an Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) in different realistic safety, security, and rescue field tests are presented. First, results from two safety and security missions at the 2009 European Land Robot Trials (ELROB) are presented. A ...
Comments
Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
September 2024
335 pages
ISBN:9798400709890
DOI:10.1145/3686038
Copyright © 2024 Owner/Author.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 16 September 2024
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
- Research
- Refereed limited
Funding Sources
Conference
TAS '24
TAS '24: Second International Symposium on Trustworthy Autonomous Systems
September 16 - 18, 2024
TX, Austin, USA
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- 0Total Citations
- 110Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)110
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)28
Reflects downloads up to 27 Jan 2025
Other Metrics
Citations
View Options
View options
View or Download as a PDF file.
PDFeReader
View online with eReader.
eReaderHTML Format
View this article in HTML Format.
HTML FormatLogin options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in