Opportunities and obligations to take turns in collaborative multi-party human-robot interaction

21Citations
Citations of this article
89Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

In this paper we present a data-driven model for detecting opportunities and obligations for a robot to take turns in multi-party discussions about objects. The data used for the model was collected in a public setting, where the robot head Furhat played a collaborative card sorting game together with two users. The model makes a combined detection of addressee and turn-yielding cues, using multi-modal data from voice activity, syntax, prosody, head pose, movement of cards, and dialogue context. The best result for a binary decision is achieved when several modalities are combined, giving a weighted F1 score of 0.876 on data from a previously unseen interaction, using only automatically extractable features..

References Powered by Scopus

YIN, a fundamental frequency estimator for speech and music

1596Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Some functions of gaze-direction in social interaction

1528Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Some signals and rules for taking speaking turns in conversations

844Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Cited by Powered by Scopus

Turn-taking in Conversational Systems and Human-Robot Interaction: A Review

137Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Prosodic patterns in English conversation

70Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Exploring turn-taking cues in multi-party human-robot discussions about objects

60Citations
N/AReaders
Get full text

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Johansson, M., & Skantze, G. (2015). Opportunities and obligations to take turns in collaborative multi-party human-robot interaction. In SIGDIAL 2015 - 16th Annual Meeting of the Special Interest Group on Discourse and Dialogue, Proceedings of the Conference (pp. 305–314). Association for Computational Linguistics (ACL). https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/w15-4642

Readers' Seniority

Tooltip

PhD / Post grad / Masters / Doc 26

60%

Researcher 9

21%

Professor / Associate Prof. 6

14%

Lecturer / Post doc 2

5%

Readers' Discipline

Tooltip

Computer Science 37

76%

Engineering 6

12%

Linguistics 5

10%

Neuroscience 1

2%

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free