Talking About Task Progress: Towards Integrating Task Planning and Dialog for Assistive Robotic Services

Frank Broz 1 , Alessandro Di Nuovo 1 , Tony Belpaeme 1 , and Angelo Cangelosi 1
  • 1 Plymouth University, UK


The use of service robots to assist ageing people in their own homes has the potential to allow people to maintain their independence, increasing their health and quality of life. In many assistive applications, robots perform tasks on people’s behalf that they are unable or unwilling to monitor directly. It is important that users be given useful and appropriate information about task progress. People being assisted in homes and other realworld environments are likely be engaged in other activities while they wait for a service, so information should also be presented in an appropriate, nonintrusive manner. This paper presents a human-robot interaction experiment investigatingwhat type of feedback people prefer in verbal updates by a service robot about distributed assistive services. People found feedback about time until task completion more useful than feedback about events in task progress or no feedback. We also discuss future research directions that involve giving non-expert users more input into the task planning process when delays or failures occur that necessitate replanning or modifying goals.

If the inline PDF is not rendering correctly, you can download the PDF file here.

  • [1] F. Cavallo, M. Aquilano, M. C. Carrozza, and P. Dario, “Robot-era project: The vision of 3d service robotics,” in Proceedings of the International Society for Gerontechnology 8thWorld Conference on Gerontechnology, ser. ISG*ISARC ’12, 2012.

  • [2] M. Di Rocco, S. Sathyakeerthy, J. Grosinger, F. Pecora, A. Saffiotti, M. Bonaccorsi, F. Cavallo, R. Limosani, A. Manzi, G. Teti, and P. Dario, “A planner for ambient assisted living: From highlevel reasoning to low-level robot execution and back.” in AAAI Spring Symposium: Qualitative Representations for Robots, ser. AAAI Technical Report, vol. SS-14-06. AAAI, 2014.

  • [3] F. Broz, A. Di Nuovo, T. Belpaeme, and A. Cangelosi, “Multimodal robot feedback for eldercare,” in Workshop on Robot Feedback in Human-Robot Interaction: How to make a Robot Readable for a Human Interaction Partner at IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, ser. Ro-Man ’12, 2012.

  • [4] A. Di Nuovo, F. Broz, T. Belpaeme, and A. Cangelosi, “A web based multi-modal interface for elderly users of the robot-era multi-robot services,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, ser. SMC’14, 2014.

  • [5] F. Marcellini, R. Bevilacqua, S. Klemcke, F. Pecora, M. Aquilano, and F. Cavallo. (2012) Report on the robotic service analysiswith respect to elderly users, ROBOT-ERA deliverable D2.1.

  • [6] M. Marge, A. Pappu, B. Frisch, T. K. Harris, and A. I. Rudnicky, “Exploring spoken dialog interaction in human-robot teams,” in Robots, Games, and Research: Success stories in USARSim Workshop at IROS, ser. IROS ’09, 2009.

  • [7] S. Rosenthal and M. M. Veloso, “Mixed-initiative long-term interactions with an all-day-companion robot.” in AAAI Fall Symposium: Dialog with Robots, ser. AAAI Technical Report, vol. FS- 10-05. AAAI, 2010.

  • [8] M. R. McGee-Lennon, M. K. Wolters, and S. Brewster, “Usercentred multimodal reminders for assistive living,” in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ser. CHI ’11. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2011, pp. 2105– 2114. [Online]. Available: 1979248

  • [9] T. Bickmore, D. Mauer, F. Crespo, and T. Brown, “Negotiating task interruptions with virtual agents for health behavior change,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Joint Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 3, ser. AAMAS ’08. Richland, SC: International Foundation for Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, 2008, pp. 1241–1244. [Online]. Available:

  • [10] D. Warnock, M. McGee-Lennon, and S. Brewster, “Multiple notification modalities and older users,” in Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, ser. CHI ’13. New York, NY, USA: ACM, 2013, pp. 1091– 1094. [Online]. Available: 2466139

  • [11] A. Leeper, K. Hsiao, M. Ciocarlie, L. Takayama, and D. Gossow, “Strategies for human-in-the-loop robotic grasping,” in Human- Robot Interaction (HRI), 2012 7th ACM/IEEE International Conference on, March 2012, pp. 1–8.

  • [12] C. A. Miller and R. Parasuraman, “Designing for flexible interaction between humans and automation: delegation interfaces for supervisory control,” Human Factors, vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 57–75, 2007.

  • [13] E. M. Roth, M. L. Hanson, C. Hopkins, V. Mancuso, and G. L. Zacharias, “Human in the loop evaluation of a mixed-initiative system for planning and control of multiple uav teams,” Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 280–284, 2004.

  • [14] F. Cavallo, R. Limosani, A. Manzi, M. Bonaccorsi, R. Esposito, M. Di Rocco, F. Pecora, G. Teti, A. Saflotti, and P. Dario, “Development of a socially believable multi-robot solution from town to home,” Cognitive Computation, pp. 1–14, 2014. [Online]. Available:

  • [15] “Acapela voice as a service,”

  • [16] M. Di Rocco, F. Pecora, and A. Saflotti, “When robots are late: Configuration planning for multiple robots with dynamic goals,” in Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2013 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on, Nov 2013, pp. 9515–5922.


Journal + Issues