Cited By
View all- Bulteau LHazon NPage RRosenfeld ATalmon N(2021)Justified Representation for Perpetual VotingIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.30950879(96598-96612)Online publication date: 2021
Human-Agent Interaction for Human Space Exploration
Pages 9 - 12
Abstract
Human space exploration creates unique challenges and opportunities for many scientific disciplines. From the human-agent interaction perspective, these require significant advances in the way that agents model, adapt and personalize their behavior to individual astronauts and groups of astronauts. In this paper, we highlight the key challenges and opportunities that human space exploration provides to the agent and UMAP communities and present two avenues for future research. We further propose a viable way to explore these challenges and opportunities through the world-wide analogue space programs which solicit research proposals from all scientific disciplines.
References
[1]
Moon village: A vision for global cooperation and space 4.0. https://moonvillageassociation.org/. Accessed: 2019-03-03.
[2]
NASA releases plan outlining next steps in the journey to mars. https://www.nasa.gov/topics/moon-to-mars. Accessed: 2019-03-03.
[3]
Team dynamics in spaceflight analogs: Shared mental models, informal social roles, and team viability and conflict in the human exploration research analog (HERA).
[4]
Kenneth J Arrow. Social choice and individual values, volume 12. Yale university press, 2012.
[5]
David Benrimoh, Robert Fratila, Sonia Israel, Kelly Perlman, Nykan Mirchi, Sneha Desai, Ariel Rosenfeld, Sabrina Knappe, Jason Behrmann, Colleen Rollins, et al. Aifred health, a deep learning powered clinical decision support system for mental health. In The NIPS'17 Competition: Building Intelligent Systems, pages 251--287. Springer, 2018.
[6]
Sheryl L Bishop. From earth analogues to space: learning how to boldly go. In On orbit and beyond, pages 25--50. Springer, 2013.
[7]
SL Bishop. Psychological and psychosocial health and well-being at pole station. Project Boreas: A Station for the Martian Geographic North Pole, pages 160--171, 2006.
[8]
Tathagata Chakraborti, Sarath Sreedharan, Sachin Grover, and Subbarao Kambhampati. Plan explanations as model reconciliation. In 2019 14th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI), pages 258--266. IEEE, 2019.
[9]
Michal Chalamish and Sarit Kraus. Automed: an automated mediator for multi-issue bilateral negotiations. Autonomous Agents and Multi-Agent Systems, 24(3):536--564, 2012.
[10]
Barbara Grosz. What question would turing pose today? AI Magazine, 33(4):73, 2012.
[11]
Scott Kelly. Endurance: My Year in Space, a Lifetime of Discovery. Vintage, 2017.
[12]
Akiva Kleinerman, Ariel Rosenfeld, and Sarit Kraus. Providing explanations for recommendations in reciprocal environments. In Proceedings of the 12th ACM Conference on Recommender Systems, pages 22--30. ACM, 2018.
[13]
Elizabeth Song Lockard. Current directions in space exploration. In Human Migration to Space, pages 11--37. Springer, 2014.
[14]
Reuth Mirsky, Yakov Kobi Gal, and Stuart M Shieber. Cradle: an online plan recognition algorithm for exploratory domains. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology (TIST), 8(3):45, 2017.
[15]
Sanjay Modgil, Francesca Toni, Floris Bex, Ivan Bratko, Carlos I Chesnevar, Wolfgang Dvovr ák, Marcelo A Falappa, Xiuyi Fan, Sarah Alice Gaggl, Alejandro J Garc'ia, et al. The added value of argumentation. In Agreement technologies, pages 357--403. Springer, 2013.
[16]
Hanan Rosemarin, Ariel Rosenfeld, and Sarit Kraus. Emergency department online patient-caregiver scheduling. In AAAI. 2019.
[17]
Ariel Rosenfeld, Noa Agmon, Oleg Maksimov, and Sarit Kraus. Intelligent agent supporting human--multi-robot team collaboration. Artificial Intelligence, 252:211--231, 2017.
[18]
Ariel Rosenfeld, David Benrimoh, Caitrin Armstrong, Nykan Mirchi, Timothe Langlois-Therrien, Colleen Rollins, Myriam Tanguay-Sela, Joseph Mehltretter, Robert Fratila, Sonia Israel, et al. Big data analytics and ai in mental healthcare. arXiv preprint arXiv:1903.12071, 2019.
[19]
Ariel Rosenfeld and Sarit Kraus. Providing arguments in discussions on the basis of the prediction of human argumentative behavior. ACM Transactions on Interactive Intelligent Systems (TiiS), 6(4):30, 2016.
[20]
Ariel Rosenfeld and Sarit Kraus. Predicting human decision-making: From prediction to action. Synthesis Lectures on Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning, 12(1):1--150, 2018.
[21]
Saya Shacham. A shortened version of the profile of mood states. Journal of personality assessment, 47(3):305--306, 1983.
[22]
Onn Shehory and Sarit Kraus. Methods for task allocation via agent coalition formation. Artificial intelligence, 101(1--2):165--200, 1998.
[23]
Tammar Shrot, Avi Rosenfeld, Jennifer Golbeck, and Sarit Kraus. Crisp: an interruption management algorithm based on collaborative filtering. In Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems, pages 3035--3044. ACM, 2014.
[24]
Peter Suedfeld and G Daniel Steel. The environmental psychology of capsule habitats. Annual review of psychology, 51(1):227--253, 2000.
[25]
Alan M Turing. Computing machinery and intelligence. Mind, 59(236):433--460, 1950.
[26]
Douglas A Vakoch. Psychology of space exploration: Contemporary research in historical perspective. Government Printing Office, 2011.
[27]
Douglas A Weigmann and Scott A Shappell. Human factors analysis of postaccident data: Applying theoretical taxonomies of human error. The International Journal of Aviation Psychology, 7(1):67--81, 1997.
[28]
JA Williamson, RK Webb, A Sellen, WB Runciman, and JH Van der Walt. Human failure: an analysis of 2000 incident reports. Anaesthesia and intensive care, 21(5):678--683, 1993.
[29]
Christopher Winship and Stephen L Morgan. The estimation of causal effects from observational data. Annual review of sociology, 25(1):659--706, 1999.
[30]
John Young and Robert Crippen. Wings in Orbit: Scientific and Engineering Legacies of the Space Shuttle, 1971--2010, volume 3409. Government Printing Office, 2011.
Index Terms
- Human-Agent Interaction for Human Space Exploration
Recommendations
Studying Human-Agent Interactions in Space Invaders
HAI '20: Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Human-Agent InteractionWe conducted an exploratory study to investigate human-agent interactions in the context of the Space Invaders game. In the study, the participants experienced an Uncooperative and a Cooperative agent. Although cooperation was unexpected, our results ...
The effects of cooperative agent behavior on human cooperativeness
AAMAS '09: Proceedings of The 8th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems - Volume 2In this paper we examine the question of how cooperativeness of a software agent affects cooperativeness of a human player. Our data shows that humans behave more cooperatively towards agents that negotiate with them in a cooperative way.
Improving of Robotic Virtual Agent’s Errors Accepted by Agent’s Reaction and Human’s Preference
Social RoboticsAbstractOne way to improve the relationship between humans and anthropomorphic agents is to have humans empathize with the agents. In this study, we focused on a task between an agent and a human in which the agent makes a mistake. To investigate ...
Comments
Please enable JavaScript to view thecomments powered by Disqus.Information & Contributors
Information
Published In
June 2019
455 pages
ISBN:9781450367110
DOI:10.1145/3314183
- General Chairs:
- George Angelos Papadopoulos,
- George Samaras,
- Stephan Weibelzahl,
- Program Chairs:
- Dietmar Jannach,
- Olga C. Santos
Copyright © 2019 ACM.
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than ACM must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected]
Sponsors
Publisher
Association for Computing Machinery
New York, NY, United States
Publication History
Published: 06 June 2019
Check for updates
Author Tags
Qualifiers
- Research-article
Conference
UMAP '19: 27th Conference on User Modeling, Adaptation and Personalization
June 9 - 12, 2019
Larnaca, Cyprus
Acceptance Rates
UMAP'19 Adjunct Paper Acceptance Rate 30 of 122 submissions, 25%;
Overall Acceptance Rate 162 of 633 submissions, 26%
Upcoming Conference
Contributors
Other Metrics
Bibliometrics & Citations
Bibliometrics
Article Metrics
- View Citations1Total Citations
- 159Total Downloads
- Downloads (Last 12 months)12
- Downloads (Last 6 weeks)1
Reflects downloads up to 20 Nov 2024
Other Metrics
Citations
Cited By
View all- Bulteau LHazon NPage RRosenfeld ATalmon N(2021)Justified Representation for Perpetual VotingIEEE Access10.1109/ACCESS.2021.30950879(96598-96612)Online publication date: 2021
View Options
Login options
Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.
Sign in