Telepresence

profile

How can we improve telep­res­ence sys­tems (such as con­fer­ence robots) so they are not just “zoom on wheels” but actu­al­ly allow users to feel more present and nav­i­gate more easily around remote environments?”

FeetBack: Augmenting Robotic Telepresence with Haptic Feedback on the Feet

Telepresence robots allow people to par­tic­i­pate in remote spaces, yet they can be dif­fi­cult to manoeu­vre with people and obsta­cles around. We designed a haptic-feed­back system called “FeetBack,” which users place their feet in when dri­ving a telep­res­ence robot. When the robot approach­es people or obsta­cles, haptic prox­im­i­ty and col­li­sion feed­back are pro­vid­ed on the respec­tive sides of the feet, help­ing inform users about events that are hard to notice through the robot’s camera views. We con­duct­ed two stud­ies: one to explore the usage of FeetBack in vir­tu­al envi­ron­ments, anoth­er focused on real envi­ron­ments. We found that FeetBack can increase spa­tial pres­ence in simple vir­tu­al envi­ron­ments. Users valued the feed­back to adjust their behav­iour in both types of envi­ron­ments, though it was some­times too fre­quent or unneed­ed for cer­tain sit­u­a­tions after a period of time. These results point to the value of foot-based haptic feed­back for telep­res­ence robot sys­tems, while also the need to design con­text-sen­si­tive haptic feedback

Conference pre­sen­ta­tion at ICMI 2020:

System overview:

[mediatags]proj–feetback[/mediatags]

Publications

37904 proj–feetback 1 apa 50 date desc 1 1 3642 https://iat-ispace2.dcr.sfu.ca/wp-content/plugins/zotpress/

 

How automatic speed control based on distance affects user behaviours in telepresence robot navigation within dense conference-like environments

Telepresence robots allow users to be spa­tial­ly and social­ly present in remote envi­ron­ments. Yet, it can be chal­leng­ing to remote­ly oper­ate telep­res­ence robots, espe­cial­ly in dense envi­ron­ments such as aca­d­e­m­ic con­fer­ences or work­places. In this paper, we pri­mar­i­ly focus on the effect that a speed con­trol method, which auto­mat­i­cal­ly slows the telep­res­ence robot down when get­ting closer to obsta­cles, has on user behav­iors. In our first user study, par­tic­i­pants drove the robot through a static obsta­cle course with narrow sec­tions. Results indi­cate that the auto­mat­ic speed con­trol method sig­nif­i­cant­ly decreas­es the number of col­li­sions. For the second study we designed a more nat­u­ral­is­tic, con­fer­ence-like exper­i­men­tal envi­ron­ment with tasks that require social inter­ac­tion, and col­lect­ed sub­jec­tive respons­es from the par­tic­i­pants when they were asked to nav­i­gate through the envi­ron­ment. While about half of the par­tic­i­pants pre­ferred auto­mat­ic speed con­trol because it allowed for smoother and safer nav­i­ga­tion, others did not want to be influ­enced by an auto­mat­ic mech­a­nism. Overall, the results sug­gest that auto­mat­ic speed con­trol sim­pli­fies the user inter­face for telep­res­ence robots in static dense envi­ron­ments, but should be con­sid­ered as option­al­ly avail­able, espe­cial­ly in sit­u­a­tions involv­ing social interactions.

[mediatags]proj–conferenceRobotSpeedControl[/mediatags]

Publications

37904 proj–conferenceRobotSpeedControl 1 apa 50 date desc 1 1 3642 https://iat-ispace2.dcr.sfu.ca/wp-content/plugins/zotpress/

Geocaching with a Beam: Shared Outdoor Activities through a Telepresence Robot with 360 Degree Viewing

People often enjoy shar­ing out­door activ­i­ties togeth­er such as walk­ing and hiking. However, when family and friends are sep­a­rat­ed by dis­tance it can be dif­fi­cult if not impos­si­ble to share such activ­i­ties. We explore this design space by inves­ti­gat­ing the ben­e­fits and chal­lenges of using a telep­res­ence robot to sup­port out­door leisure activ­i­ties. In our study, par­tic­i­pants par­tic­i­pat­ed in the out­door activ­i­ty of geo­caching where one person geo­cached with the help of a remote part­ner via a telep­res­ence robot. We com­pared a wide field of view (WFOV) camera to a 360° camera. Results show the ben­e­fits of having a phys­i­cal embod­i­ment and a sense of immer­sion with the 360° view. Yet chal­lenges relat­ed to a lack of envi­ron­men­tal aware­ness, safety issues, and pri­va­cy con­cerns result­ing from bystander inter­ac­tions. These find­ings illus­trate the need to design telep­res­ence robots with the envi­ron­ment and public in mind to pro­vide an enhanced sen­so­ry expe­ri­ence while bal­anc­ing safety and pri­va­cy issues result­ing from being amongst the gen­er­al public.

[mediatags]proj–geocaching[/mediatags]

illus­tra­tion of geo­caching with a telep­res­ence robot

Publications

37904 proj–geocaching 1 apa 50 date desc 1 1 3642 https://iat-ispace2.dcr.sfu.ca/wp-content/plugins/zotpress/