Abstract
Effective robot-to-human communication can increase transparency and trust, reduce uncertainty, and contribute to safer collaboration in shared workspaces. Designing and validating an effective robot communication strategy is challenging due to the varying and often limited communication modalities across robots, differences in how diverse recipients interpret messages, and the underexplored virtual-to-real gap in studies of communication legibility. We present a systematic, large-scale comparative validation of existing communication strategies for a mobile non-humanoid robot across message types and settings (online and in-person). Based on the prescribed message types in the existing standards for industrial robots, we realize and compare a low-expressive, unimodal LED-based strategy with a highly expressive, multimodal one that leverages robotic gaze, gestures, and voice. For each strategy, we analyze the communication of a turning intention, an attention request, error status, whether the robot is stuck, and whether it is functioning normally. We evaluate these strategies in replicated online and in-person experiments. We find strong evidence that highly expressive multimodal communication is perceived as more legible and intuitive than unimodal LED-based communication. Comparing the online and real-world study findings, we observe a notable decrease in overall legibility, particularly for signaling with LEDs. Similarly, confidence in message interpretation decreases during the real-world evaluation.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2606.24445
