AI-based writing assistants are ubiquitous, yet little is known about how users’ mental models shape their use. We examine two types of mental models—functional or related to what the system does, and structural or related to how the system works—and how they affect control behavior—how users request, accept, or edit AI suggestions as they write—and writing outcomes. We primed participants (N = 48) with different system descriptions to induce these mental models before asking them to complete a cover letter writing task using a writing assistant that occasionally offered preconfigured ungrammatical suggestions to test whether the mental models affected participants’ critical oversight. We find that while participants in the structural mental model condition demonstrate a better understanding of the system, this can have a backfiring effect: while these participants judged the system as more usable, they also produced letters with more grammatical errors, highlighting a complex relationship between system understanding, trust, and control in contexts that require user oversight of error-prone AI outputs.

In this paper, we critically examine the current "humanoid hype" in robotics, questioning its alignment with responsible robotics principles. While technical challenges drive internal fascination, the pervasive public image of humanoids demands deeper HRI engagement. We explore how responsible robotics concepts, such as privacy, dignity, and trust, are uniquely challenged or overlooked in the pursuit of anthropomorphic robot forms. By dissecting this hype, and mapping the main findings of the recently-published Roadmap for Responsible Robotics to the humanoids field, we aim to move beyond technical form-factor obsessions to understand the true societal implications and identify potential blind spots for the HRI community.

With the growing need to regulate AI systems across a wide variety of application domains, a new set of occupations has emerged in the industry. The so-called responsible Artificial Intelligence (AI) practitioners or AI ethicists are generally tasked with interpreting and operationalizing best practices for ethical and safe design of AI systems. Due to the nascent nature of these roles, however, it is unclear to future employers and aspiring AI ethicists what specific function these roles serve and what skills are necessary to serve the functions. Without clarity on these, we cannot train future AI ethicists with meaningful learning objectives.

Identifying potential social and ethical risks in emerging machine learning (ML) models and their applications remains challenging. In this work, we applied two well-established safety engineering frameworks (FMEA, STPA) to a case study involving text-to-image models at three stages of the ML product development pipeline: data processing, integration of a T2I model with other models, and use. Results of our analysis demonstrate the safety frameworks – both of which are not designed explicitly examine social and ethical risks – can uncover failure and hazards that pose social and ethical risks. We discovered a broad range of failures and hazards (i.e., functional, social, and ethical) by analyzing interactions (i.e., between different ML models in the product, between the ML product and user, and between development teams) and processes (i.e., preparation of training data or workflows for using an ML service/product). Our findings underscore the value and importance of examining beyond an ML model in examining social and ethical risks, especially when we have minimal information about an ML model.

Understanding the landscape of potential harms from algorithmic systems enables practitioners to better anticipate consequences of the systems they build. It also supports the prospect of incorporating controls to help minimize harms that emerge from the interplay of technologies and social and cultural dynamics. A growing body of scholarship has identified a wide range of harms across different algorithmic technologies. However, computing research and practitioners lack a high level and synthesized overview of harms from algorithmic systems. Based on a scoping review of computing research (n=172), we present an applied taxonomy of sociotechnical harms to support a more systematic surfacing of potential harms in algorithmic systems. The final taxonomy builds on and refers to existing taxonomies, classifications, and terminologies. Five major themes related to sociotechnical harms — representational, allocative, quality-of-service, interpersonal harms, and social system/societal harms — and sub-themes are presented along with a description of these categories. We conclude with a discussion of challenges and opportunities for future research.

Inappropriate design and deployment of machine learning (ML) systems lead to negative downstream social and ethical impacts – described here as social and ethical risks – for users, society, and the environment. Despite the growing need to regulate ML systems, current processes for assessing and mitigating risks are disjointed and inconsistent. We interviewed 30 industry practitioners on their current social and ethical risk management practices and collected their first reactions on adapting safety engineering frameworks into their practice – namely, System Theoretic Process Analysis (STPA) and Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). Our findings suggest STPA/FMEA can provide an appropriate structure for social and ethical risk assessment and mitigation processes. However, we also find nontrivial challenges in integrating such frameworks in the fast-paced culture of the ML industry. We call on the CHI community to strengthen existing frameworks and assess their efficacy, ensuring that ML systems are safer for all people.

Does the norm of first-come-first-serve (FCFS) equally apply to those piloting a Mobile Remote Presence (MRP) system as to those who are physically present with it? While telepresence robots could make social interactions more accessible and enjoyable for geographically-constrained individuals, such an outcome requires both pilots and local users of MRPs to share the same social norm expectations that govern their use. To address this question, we conducted an online study$(N=903)$involving simulated human-MRP interaction scenarios. Our results suggest that those remotely piloting the MRP-rather than local users-assign the robot to a lower social priority; they find it more appropriate when local users ignore queue order than when pilots ignore queue order. Furthermore, we provide significant empirical evidence that local users expect different social norms to be upheld depending on how they perceive the robot. Those who perceive MRPs simply as robots-rather than an extension of a person-do not expect the FCFS norm to be respected for MRPs.

How do we make concrete progress towards de-signing robots that can navigate ethically sensitive contexts? Almost two decades after the word ‘roboethics’ was coined, translating interdisciplinary roboethics discussions into techni-cal design still remains a daunting task. This paper describes our first attempt at addressing these challenges through a roboethics-themed design competition. The design competition setting allowed us to (a) formulate ethical considerations as an engineering design task that anyone with basic programming skills can tackle; and (b) develop a prototype evaluation scheme that incorporates diverse normative perspectives of multiple stakeholders. The initial implementation of the competition was held online at the RO-MAN 2021 conference. The competition task involved programming a simulated mobile robot (TIAGo) that delivers items for individuals in the home environment, where many of these tasks involve ethically sensitive con-texts (e.g., an underage family member asks for an alcoholic drink). This paper outlines our experiences implementing the competition and the lessons we learned. We highlight design competitions as a promising mechanism to enable a new wave of roboethics research equipped with technical design solutions.

When the question of who should get access to a communal resource first is uncertain, people often negotiate via nonverbal communication to resolve the conflict. What should a robot be programmed to do when such conflicts arise in Human-Robot Interaction? The answer to this question varies depending on the context of the situation. Learning from how humans use hesitation gestures to negotiate a solution in such conflict situations, we present a human-inspired design of nonverbal hesitation gestures that can be used for Human-Robot Negotiation. We extracted characteristic features of such negotiative hesitations humans use, and subsequently designed a trajectory generator (Negotiative Hesitation Generator) that can re-create the features in robot responses to conflicts. Our human-subjects experiment demonstrates the efficacy of the designed robot behaviour against non-negotiative stopping behaviour of a robot. With positive results from our human-robot interaction experiment, we provide a validated trajectory generator with which one can explore the dynamics of human-robot nonverbal negotiation of resource conflicts.

Lethal autonomous weapons (LAWS) are an emerging technology capable of automatically targeting and exercising lethal force. Many scholars and advocates have petitioned to ban the technology internationally for a myriad of reasons. However, there are practical challenges to implementing a ban. One such challenge is posed by the “intangible” nature of the software that LAWS depends on, which is incompatible with implementation mechanisms such as export control. Given the dual-use nature of software, and the fact that software is developed by teams of individuals, a number of soft governance mechanisms have been proposed to regulate this technology. In this paper, we investigate the feasibility of one particular approach: leveraging open source licenses as a means to prohibit the use of certain software in LAWS. This approach is largely motivated by the fact that open source software underpins all of technology, especially AI. Through a review of the recent tech activism and open source activism, we evaluate whether open source licenses can feasibly limit the use of open source software to only non-LAWS applications. We distill the current challenges facing “ethics-driven” open source licensing efforts into three main obstacles: the need for clarity of licensing language, the lack of enforceability of licenses, and the lack of cohesiveness of the open source community. We propose that addressing these factors are also success criteria for future anti-LAWS open source initiatives. We find that open source licenses provide more theoretical than practical promise in regulating LAWS, and conclude that cohesion in the open source community is the key to their potential practical success in the future.

In this work we explore the effectiveness of a three-fingered robotic gripper in accurately expressing directional instructions (move up, down, left, right) as gestures emulating human hand gestures. Such gestures can be necessary in noisy manufacturing environments where verbal communication is ineffective. Three studies are conducted. In Study 1 we explore hand configurations that human dyads use for nonverbal instruction (n = 17). In Study 2 we examine which hand-configurations from Study 1 are most accurately understood by observers (n = 140). In Study 3 we compare performance between a robot arm performing similar motions to those of human study participants using either an unposed or posed three-fingered robotic gripper (n =100) to observe the importance of the hand's pose. Recognition rates of directional gestures for both the human and the robot are examined. Results indicate that most gestures are better and more confidently recognized when displayed with the posed robot hand.

With the rise in popularity of robot-mediated teleconference (telepresence) systems, there is an increased demand for user interfaces that simplify control of the systems' mobility. This is especially true if the display/camera is to be controlled by users while remotely collaborating with another person. In this work, we compare the efficacy of a conventional keyboard and a non-contact, gesture-based, Leap interface in controlling the display/camera of a 7-DoF (degrees of freedom) telepresence platform for remote collaboration. Twenty subjects participated in our usability study where performance, ease of use, and workload were compared between the interfaces. While Leap allowed smoother and more continuous control of the platform, our results indicate that the keyboard provided superior performance in terms of task completion time, ease of use, and workload. We discuss the implications of novel interface designs for telepresence applications.

In this paper we provide empirical evidence that using humanlike gaze cues during human-robot handovers can improve the timing and perceived quality of the handover event. Handovers serve as the foundation of many human-robot tasks. Fluent, legible handover interactions require appropriate nonverbal cues to signal handover intent, location and timing. Inspired by observations of human-human handovers, we implemented gaze behaviors on a PR2 humanoid robot. The robot handed over water bottles to a total of 102 naïve subjects while varying its gaze behaviour: no gaze, gaze designed to elicit shared attention at the handover location, and the shared attention gaze complemented with a turn-taking cue. We compared subject perception of and reaction time to the robot-initiated handovers across the three gaze conditions. Results indicate that subjects reach for the offered object significantly earlier when a robot provides a shared attention gaze cue during a handover. We also observed a statistical trend of subjects preferring handovers with turn-taking gaze cues over the other conditions. Our work demonstrates that gaze can play a key role in improving user experience of human-robot handovers, and help make handovers fast and fluent.

In collaborative tasks, people often communicate using nonverbal gestures to coordinate actions. When two people reach for the same object at the same time, they often respond to an imminent potential collision with jerky halting hand motions that we term hesitation gestures. Successful implementation of such communicative conflict response behaviour onto robots can be useful. In a myriad of human-robot interaction contexts involving shared spaces and objects, this behaviour can provide a fast and effective means for robots to express awareness of conflict and cede right-of-way during collaborative work with users. Our previous work suggests that when a six-degree-of-freedom (6-DOF) robot traces a simplified trajectory of recorded human hesitation gestures, these robot motions are also perceived by humans as hesitation gestures. In this work, we present a characteristic motion profile derived from the recorded human hesitation motions, called the Acceleration-based Hesitation Profile (AHP). We test its efficacy to generate communicative hesitation responses by a robot in a fast-paced human-robot interaction experiment.

This work explores a novel interaction paradigm driven by implicit, low-attention user control, accomplished by monitoring a user's physiological state. We have designed and prototyped this interaction for a first use case of bookmarking an audio stream, to holistically explore the implicit interaction concept. Here, a user's galvanic skin conductance (GSR) is monitored for orienting responses (ORs) to external interruptions; our prototype automatically bookmarks the media such that the user can attend to the interruption, then resume listening from the point he/she is interrupted. To test this approach's viability, we addressed questions such as: does GSR exhibit a detectable response to interruptions, and how should the interaction utilize this information? In evaluating this system in a controlled environment, we found an OR detection accuracy of 84%; users provided subjective feedback on its accuracy and utility.

Unwanted conflicts are inevitable between collaborating agents that share spaces and resources. Motivated by the use of nonverbal communications as a conflict resolution mechanism by humans, this study investigates the communicative capabilities reflected in the trajectory characteristics of hesitation gestures during human-robot collaboration. Hesitation gestures and non-hesitation human arm motions were recorded from a series of reach-and-retract tasks and embodied on a 6-DOF robot arm. A total of 86 survey respondents watched and scored recordings of these motions according to whether they recognized hesitation gestures as exhibited by both the human and the robot. Using the survey's statistical evidence indicating that hesitation trajectories embodied in an articulated robot arm can be recognized by human observers, we identified trajectory characteristics of hesitation gestures. The contribution of our work is an empirically grounded robot trajectory specification that provides communicative cues for conflict resolution during collaborative reaching scenarios.