More Like this

1. SEAN-VR: An Immersive Virtual Reality Experience for Evaluating Social Robot Navigation

   https://doi.org/10.1145/3568294.3580039  

   Zhang, Qiping; Tsoi, Nathan; Vázquez, Marynel (March 2023, Companion of the 2023 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human- Robot Interaction)

   We propose a demonstration of the Social Environment for Autonomous Navigation with Virtual Reality (VR) for advancing research in Human-Robot Interaction. In our demonstration, a user controls a virtual avatar in simulation and performs directed navigation tasks with a mobile robot in a warehouse environment. Our demonstration shows how researchers can leverage the immersive nature of VR to study robot navigation from a user-centered perspective in densely populated environments while avoiding physical safety concerns common with operating robots in the real world. This is important for studying interactions with robots driven by algorithms that are early in their development lifecycle. 

   more » « less
2. Multi-Robot Cooperative Socially-Aware Navigation Using Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning

   https://doi.org/10.1109/ICRA57147.2024.10611322  

   Wang, Weizheng; Mao, Le; Wang, Ruiqi; Min, Byung-Cheol (May 2024, IEEE)

   In public spaces shared with humans, ensuring multi-robot systems navigate without collisions while respecting social norms is challenging, particularly with limited communication. Although current robot social navigation techniques leverage advances in reinforcement learning and deep learning, they frequently overlook robot dynamics in simulations, leading to a simulation-to-reality gap. In this paper, we bridge this gap by presenting a new multi-robot social navigation environment crafted using Dec-POSMDP and multi-agent reinforcement learning. Furthermore, we introduce SAMARL: a novel benchmark for cooperative multi-robot social navigation. SAMARL employs a unique spatial-temporal transformer combined with multi-agent reinforcement learning. This approach effectively captures the complex interactions between robots and humans, thus promoting cooperative tendencies in multi-robot systems. Our extensive experiments reveal that SAMARL outperforms existing baseline and ablation models in our designed environment. Demo videos for this work can be found at: https://sites.google.com/view/samarl 

   more » « less
3. Students use their lived experiences to justify their beliefs about how they will approach process safety judgements.

   Stransky, J.; Ritz, C.; Bodnar, C.A.; Dringenberg, E.; Miskioglu, E. (January 2023, ASEE annual conference exposition proceedings)

   In the chemical industry, judgements related to process safety hold the potential to lead to process incidents, such as chemical leaks and mechanical failures that can have severe consequences. Many of these judgements require engineers to juxtapose competing criteria including leadership, production, relationships, safety, spending, and time. For such judgements, numerous factors are at play, including our beliefs about ourselves and our intention to behave a particular way. As part of a larger research project funded through the NSF Research in the Formation of Engineers (RFE) program, we are working to investigate: 1) What do engineering students and practitioners believe about how they approach making judgements?, 2) how do they behave when actually making judgements?, 3) what gap, if any, exists between their beliefs and behavior?, and 4) how do they reconcile any gaps between their beliefs and behaviors? After completion of the first year of the project, we have interviewed fourteen senior chemical engineering students about how they believe they will approach process safety judgements in scenarios where they must juxtapose competing criteria. During our initial analysis to characterize students’ espoused beliefs about their approaches towards making process safety judgements, we identified an emergent finding about how they justify these beliefs. We present this emergent finding by answering the research question: How do undergraduate engineering students justify their beliefs about how they will make judgements in process safety contexts? When we asked students to provide reasoning for the beliefs they conveyed about how they will approach process safety judgements, we found that overwhelmingly, students used their lived experiences in different work settings to justify their beliefs. These lived experiences included engineering co-ops, internships, volunteer, and retail work. This emergent finding suggests that students’ lived experiences may be greatly informing their espoused beliefs about how they will approach process safety judgements. This paper will also briefly discuss implications for process safety educators on how they may incorporate lived experiences, or other ways of knowing, so students may develop more robust beliefs about process safety judgements. 

   more » « less
4. Board 419: Students use their Lived Experiences to Justify their Beliefs about How they Will Approach Process Safety Judgment

   Stransky, J.; Ritz, C.; Bodnar, C.A.; Dringenberg, E.; Miskioglu, E. (January 2023, ASEE annual conference exposition proceedings)

   In the chemical industry, judgements related to process safety hold the potential to lead to process incidents, such as chemical leaks and mechanical failures that can have severe consequences. Many of these judgements require engineers to juxtapose competing criteria including leadership, production, relationships, safety, spending, and time. For such judgements, numerous factors are at play, including our beliefs about ourselves and our intention to behave a particular way. As part of a larger research project funded through the NSF Research in the Formation of Engineers (RFE) program, we are working to investigate: 1) What do engineering students and practitioners believe about how they approach making judgements?, 2) how do they behave when actually making judgements?, 3) what gap, if any, exists between their beliefs and behavior?, and 4) how do they reconcile any gaps between their beliefs and behaviors? After completion of the first year of the project, we have interviewed fourteen senior chemical engineering students about how they believe they will approach process safety judgements in scenarios where they must juxtapose competing criteria. During our initial analysis to characterize students’ espoused beliefs about their approaches towards making process safety judgements, we identified an emergent finding about how they justify these beliefs. We present this emergent finding by answering the research question: How do undergraduate engineering students justify their beliefs about how they will make judgements in process safety contexts? When we asked students to provide reasoning for the beliefs they conveyed about how they will approach process safety judgements, we found that overwhelmingly, students used their lived experiences in different work settings to justify their beliefs. These lived experiences included engineering co-ops, internships, volunteer, and retail work. This emergent finding suggests that students’ lived experiences may be greatly informing their espoused beliefs about how they will approach process safety judgements. This paper will also briefly discuss implications for process safety educators on how they may incorporate lived experiences, or other ways of knowing, so students may develop more robust beliefs about process safety judgements. 

   more » « less
5. Students use their Lived Experiences to Justify their Beliefs about How they Will Approach Process Safety Judgment

   Stransky, J.; Ritz, C.; Bodnar, C. A.; Dringenberg, E.; Miskioglu, E. (January 2023, American Society of Engineering Education Annual Conference and Exposition)

   In the chemical industry, judgements related to process safety hold the potential to lead to process incidents, such as chemical leaks and mechanical failures that can have severe consequences. Many of these judgements require engineers to juxtapose competing criteria including leadership, production, relationships, safety, spending, and time. For such judgements, numerous factors are at play, including our beliefs about ourselves and our intention to behave a particular way. As part of a larger research project funded through the NSF Research in the Formation of Engineers (RFE) program, we are working to investigate: 1) What do engineering students and practitioners believe about how they approach making judgements?, 2) how do they behave when actually making judgements?, 3) what gap, if any, exists between their beliefs and behavior?, and 4) how do they reconcile any gaps between their beliefs and behaviors? After completion of the first year of the project, we have interviewed fourteen senior chemical engineering students about how they believe they will approach process safety judgements in scenarios where they must juxtapose competing criteria. During our initial analysis to characterize students’ espoused beliefs about their approaches towards making process safety judgements, we identified an emergent finding about how they justify these beliefs. We present this emergent finding by answering the research question: How do undergraduate engineering students justify their beliefs about how they will make judgements in process safety contexts? When we asked students to provide reasoning for the beliefs they conveyed about how they will approach process safety judgements, we found that overwhelmingly, students used their lived experiences in different work settings to justify their beliefs. These lived experiences included engineering co-ops, internships, volunteer, and retail work. This emergent finding suggests that students’ lived experiences may be greatly informing their espoused beliefs about how they will approach process safety judgements. This paper will also briefly discuss implications for process safety educators on how they may incorporate lived experiences, or other ways of knowing, so students may develop more robust beliefs about process safety judgements. 

   more » « less