Y.B. Eisma
Please Note
35 records found
1
...
This thesis investigated where alignment and misalignment occur between humans and AI-driven robots, and how human-robot interaction should be designed for complementary collaboration. This thesis adopts the vocabulary of Wickens’ Multiple Resource Theory, which distinguishes processing stages (perception, cognition, responding), processing modalities (visual and auditory), and processing codes (spatial, verbal). Four empirical studies targeted different processing stages and progressed in platform complexity and realism.
Across the four studies, a combined 2,292 participants generated evidence that misalignment can occur at every information-processing stage. Three overarching findings are extracted. First, outcome-level results alone are insufficient for detecting misalignment: high correlations in Chapter 2 masked different search mechanisms, and verbal fluency in Chapter 4 masked shallow reasoning. Second, as the AI system becomes more automated, the human role changes from direct operator to supervisor, from commanding every movement (Chapter 3), through evaluating automated perception and strategy (Chapter 4), to diagnosing complete LLM-generated plans (Chapter 5). Third, the quality of collaboration depends on how cognition is distributed, not only on the absolute capability of either partner: voice control freed spatial resources while gestures overloaded them (Chapter 3), and students learned to redistribute cognitive work based on model capability and task difficulty (Chapter 5).
This thesis also has limitations. The studies focused heavily on the visual modality; haptic and auditory modalities were not explicitly investigated. Each study concerned a specific domain and a relatively homogeneous participant population. Whether the documented forms of misalignment transfer to other human-robot-interaction domains, more complex environments, and more diverse populations requires further investigation. Nonetheless, the findings support a set of design principles: use modality switching to offload overloaded cognitive resources, expose AI uncertainty rather than only AI outcomes, provide calibration training before deployment, and design function allocation as dynamic instead of static. ...
This thesis investigated where alignment and misalignment occur between humans and AI-driven robots, and how human-robot interaction should be designed for complementary collaboration. This thesis adopts the vocabulary of Wickens’ Multiple Resource Theory, which distinguishes processing stages (perception, cognition, responding), processing modalities (visual and auditory), and processing codes (spatial, verbal). Four empirical studies targeted different processing stages and progressed in platform complexity and realism.
Across the four studies, a combined 2,292 participants generated evidence that misalignment can occur at every information-processing stage. Three overarching findings are extracted. First, outcome-level results alone are insufficient for detecting misalignment: high correlations in Chapter 2 masked different search mechanisms, and verbal fluency in Chapter 4 masked shallow reasoning. Second, as the AI system becomes more automated, the human role changes from direct operator to supervisor, from commanding every movement (Chapter 3), through evaluating automated perception and strategy (Chapter 4), to diagnosing complete LLM-generated plans (Chapter 5). Third, the quality of collaboration depends on how cognition is distributed, not only on the absolute capability of either partner: voice control freed spatial resources while gestures overloaded them (Chapter 3), and students learned to redistribute cognitive work based on model capability and task difficulty (Chapter 5).
This thesis also has limitations. The studies focused heavily on the visual modality; haptic and auditory modalities were not explicitly investigated. Each study concerned a specific domain and a relatively homogeneous participant population. Whether the documented forms of misalignment transfer to other human-robot-interaction domains, more complex environments, and more diverse populations requires further investigation. Nonetheless, the findings support a set of design principles: use modality switching to offload overloaded cognitive resources, expose AI uncertainty rather than only AI outcomes, provide calibration training before deployment, and design function allocation as dynamic instead of static.
End-to-end behavior cloning agent for an object handover task
Training and evaluating a robot to perform simulated human-to-robot object handovers without requiring hand-object segmentation
To address this, a behavior cloning agent is used to convert camera input into RGB-D voxel space and output discretized 6-DoF manipulation to directly discover features for the handover task. This study introduces a framework that combines the behavior cloning agent with the HandoverSim, which allows experimenting with various training configurations. These configurations consist of experiments with: 1) expert demonstration data; 2) optimal camera setup; 3) handover objects; and 4) voxel-based RGB augmentation techniques.
The trained model is evaluated on its generalization to diverse handover conditions in the HandoverSim Benchmark. The results demonstrate that the behavior cloning agent can learn features for the handover task without requiring a perception component. The model learns the grasp-object relation whilst minimizing contact with the hand. Despite this, performance is limited by sparse training data and grasping accuracy. ...
To address this, a behavior cloning agent is used to convert camera input into RGB-D voxel space and output discretized 6-DoF manipulation to directly discover features for the handover task. This study introduces a framework that combines the behavior cloning agent with the HandoverSim, which allows experimenting with various training configurations. These configurations consist of experiments with: 1) expert demonstration data; 2) optimal camera setup; 3) handover objects; and 4) voxel-based RGB augmentation techniques.
The trained model is evaluated on its generalization to diverse handover conditions in the HandoverSim Benchmark. The results demonstrate that the behavior cloning agent can learn features for the handover task without requiring a perception component. The model learns the grasp-object relation whilst minimizing contact with the hand. Despite this, performance is limited by sparse training data and grasping accuracy.
Quadruped Body Manipulation
Manipulating milking cups using only body movements
...
Perception and Control with Large Language Models in Robotic Manipulation
Developing and assessing an integrated Large Language Model System on environmental and task complexity
Attribute Focused Object Detection with Vision-Language Models
Anticipating Future Object Compositions without Forgetting
Assessing perceived Humanness of Artificial Intelligence in Chess
A Turing Test experiment using Think Aloud and Eye Tracking methods
Natural User Interface in Augmented Reality to Control Spot
A Large Scale User Study on Speech and Gesture Control of Robots With The Microsoft HoloLens
Evaluating 6D pose estimation accuracy with synthetic data
A comparative analysis of RGB based and RGB-Depth-based images in a chess piece picking task with a robotic arm
3D Plant Structure Generation
Working towards an autonomous greenhouse
The goal for this research was therefore to research the effect of such a Topology Optimization based Generative Design approach on the design performance and experience. In order to do so, a robust and user-friendly TOP-GD tool was created. In this tool, multiple design solutions are explored quickly by implementing a batch-run setup that varies several chosen parameters, without needing to manually run several optimizations consecutively. Calculations are done with a simple TO script using coarse geometries, and without taking into account manufacturing methods yet. This asks for less demanding, detailed and complicated calculations than AI-based Generative Design tools currently offer, while at the same time moving from a single TO result to generating a range of candidate solutions. A lot of effort was put in the user-friendliness of the TOP-GD tool, enabling an easy workflow for the setup of design problems and a clear presentation of the results by means of a simple GUI.
The use of the TOP-GD tool in the design process was evaluated in an experiment, where it was compared with a more simple TO tool and a basic manual design approach using just pen and paper. This was done by giving the participants of the experiments three simple design assignments, that they had to carry out using each of the design approaches one by one. Evaluation of the approaches was done by comparing the design performance, and assessing the design experience with a survey and using Eye-tracking techniques.
The results of this experiment did not show enough evidence to conclude that the different design approaches had an effect on the design performance for the simple assignments executed during the experiment. However, the results of the survey show a clear positive impact of both the TO tools on the design experience, compared to manually designing. Furthermore, the TOP-GD tool has the largest positive impact on the design experience and its use in the design process is considered a big improvement, especially in quickly exploring new design directions and creating overview. This confirms the expectation that a Topology Optimization based Generative Design approach has a positive effect on the early stages of the design process. The differences found with Eye-tracking between the TO tools support this, although a more extensive experiment should be done to convincingly confirm this conclusion. ...
The goal for this research was therefore to research the effect of such a Topology Optimization based Generative Design approach on the design performance and experience. In order to do so, a robust and user-friendly TOP-GD tool was created. In this tool, multiple design solutions are explored quickly by implementing a batch-run setup that varies several chosen parameters, without needing to manually run several optimizations consecutively. Calculations are done with a simple TO script using coarse geometries, and without taking into account manufacturing methods yet. This asks for less demanding, detailed and complicated calculations than AI-based Generative Design tools currently offer, while at the same time moving from a single TO result to generating a range of candidate solutions. A lot of effort was put in the user-friendliness of the TOP-GD tool, enabling an easy workflow for the setup of design problems and a clear presentation of the results by means of a simple GUI.
The use of the TOP-GD tool in the design process was evaluated in an experiment, where it was compared with a more simple TO tool and a basic manual design approach using just pen and paper. This was done by giving the participants of the experiments three simple design assignments, that they had to carry out using each of the design approaches one by one. Evaluation of the approaches was done by comparing the design performance, and assessing the design experience with a survey and using Eye-tracking techniques.
The results of this experiment did not show enough evidence to conclude that the different design approaches had an effect on the design performance for the simple assignments executed during the experiment. However, the results of the survey show a clear positive impact of both the TO tools on the design experience, compared to manually designing. Furthermore, the TOP-GD tool has the largest positive impact on the design experience and its use in the design process is considered a big improvement, especially in quickly exploring new design directions and creating overview. This confirms the expectation that a Topology Optimization based Generative Design approach has a positive effect on the early stages of the design process. The differences found with Eye-tracking between the TO tools support this, although a more extensive experiment should be done to convincingly confirm this conclusion.