SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2410.20496

When To Seek Help: Trust-Aware Assistance Seeking in Human-Supervised Autonomy

Abstract

Our goal is to model and experimentally assess trust evolution to predict future beliefs and behaviors of human-robot teams in dynamic environments. Research suggests that maintaining trust among team members in a human-robot team is vital for successful team performance. Research suggests that trust is a multi-dimensional and latent entity that relates to past experiences and future actions in a complex manner. Employing a human-robot collaborative task, we design an optimal assistance-seeking strategy for the robot using a POMDP framework. In the task, the human supervises an autonomous mobile manipulator collecting objects in an environment. The supervisor's task is to ensure that the robot safely executes its task. The robot can either choose to attempt to collect the object or seek human assistance. The human supervisor actively monitors the robot's activities, offering assistance upon request, and intervening if they perceive the robot may fail. In this setting, human trust is the hidden state, and the primary objective is to optimize team performance. We execute two sets of human-robot interaction experiments. The data from the first experiment are used to estimate POMDP parameters, which are used to compute an optimal assistance-seeking policy evaluated in the second experiment. The estimated POMDP parameters reveal that, for most participants, human intervention is more probable when trust is low, particularly in high-complexity tasks. Our estimates suggest that the robot's action of asking for assistance in high-complexity tasks can positively impact human trust. Our experimental results show that the proposed trust-aware policy is better than an optimal trust-agnostic policy. By comparing model estimates of human trust, obtained using only behavioral data, with the collected self-reported trust values, we show that model estimates are isomorphic to self-reported responses.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Dong Hae Mangalindan, Ericka Rovira, Vaibhav Srivastava. 2024-10-27. When To Seek Help: Trust-Aware Assistance Seeking in Human-Supervised Autonomy. https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.20496

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO