Can You Easily Perceive the Local Environment? A User Interface with One Stitched Live Video for Mobile Robotic Telepresence Systems

References

• BeamPro. (2018, July 31). Retrieved from https://suitabletech.com
   Google Scholar
• Berisha, A., Kölle, R., & Griesbaum, J. (2015). Acceptance of telepresence robots during group work. In Proceedings of the 14th International Symposium of Information Science (pp. 350–356), Zadar, Croatia.
   Google Scholar
• Boll, S. (2017). Multimedia at CHI: Telepresence at work for remote conference participation. IEEE MultiMedia, 24(3), 5–9. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/MMUL.2017.3051516
   Google Scholar
• Cesta, A., Cortellessa, G., Orlandini, A., & Tiberio, L. (2016). Long-term evaluation of a telepresence robot for the elderly: Methodology and ecological case study. International Journal of Social Robotics, 8(3), 421–441. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s12369-016-0337-z
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cha, E., Chen, S., & Mataric, M. J. (2017). Designing telepresence robots for K-12 education. In IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 683–688). doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1753193417711594
   Google Scholar
• Chen, J. Y., Haas, E. C., & Barnes, M. J. (2007). Human performance issues and user interface design for teleoperated robots. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and reviews), 37(6), 1231–1245. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCC.2007.905819
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dong, Y., Pei, M., Zhang, L., Xu, B., Wu, Y., & Jia, Y. (2019). Stitching videos from a fisheye lens camera and a wide-angle lens camera for telepresence robots. arXiv:1903.06319.
   Google Scholar
• Double2. (2018, July 31). Retrieved from http://www.doublerobotics.com
   Google Scholar
• Giraff. (2018, July 31). Retrieved from http://www.giraff.org/
   Google Scholar
• Heshmat, Y., Jones, B., Xiong, X., Neustaedter, C., Tang, A., Riecke, B. E., & Yang, L. (2018). Geocaching with a Beam: Shared outdoor activities through a telepresence robot with 360 degree viewing. In Proceedings of the 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 359: 1–359:13). Montreal, QC, Canada: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Hestand, D., & Yanco, H. A. (2004). Layered sensor modalities for improved human-robot interaction. In 2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (IEEE Cat. No. 04CH37583) (Vol. 3, pp. 2966–2970), The Hague, Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Jia, Y., Xu, B., Shen, J., Pei, M., Dong, Z., Hou, J., & Yang, M. (2015). Telepresence interaction by touching live video images. arXiv preprint arXiv:1512.04334.
   Google Scholar
• Johnson, S., Rae, I., Mutlu, B., & Takayama, L. (2015). Can you see me now? how field of view affects collaboration in robotic telepresence. In Proceedings of the 33rd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2397–2406). Seoul, Republic of Korea: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Keyes, B., Casey, R., Yanco, H. A., Maxwell, B. A., & Georgiev, Y. (2006). Camera placement and multi-camera fusion for remote robot operation. IEEE International Workshop on Safety Security & Rescue Robotics. Gaithersburg, MD, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Kiselev, A., Kristoffersson, A., & Loutfi, A. (2014). The effect of field of view on social interaction in mobile robotic telepresence systems. In Proceedings of the 2014 ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (pp. 214–215). Bielefeld, Germany: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Koceski, S., & Koceska, N. (2016). Evaluation of an assistive telepresence robot for elderly healthcare. Journal of Medical Systems, 40(5), 121. doi:https://doi.org/10.1007/s10916-016-0481-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kristoffersson, A., Coradeschi, S., & Loutfi, A. (2013). A review of mobile robotic telepresence. Advances in Human-Computer Interaction, 2013, 3.
   Google Scholar
• Lazewatsky, D. A., & Smart, W. D. (2011). A panorama interface for telepresence robots. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-robot Interaction (pp. 177–178). ACM. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1753193411427832
   Google Scholar
• MacKenzie, I. S. (2012). Human-computer interaction: An empirical research perspective. Waltham, MA, USA: Newnes.
   Google Scholar
• Neustaedter, C., Venolia, G., Procyk, J., & Hawkins, D. (2016). To beam or not to beam: A study of remote telepresence attendance at an academic conference. In Proceedings of the 19th ACM Conference on Computer-Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 418–431). ACM. doi: https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2016.53
   Google Scholar
• Nielsen, C. W., Goodrich, M. A., & Ricks, R. W. (2007). Ecological interfaces for improving mobile robot teleoperation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 23(5), 927–941. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/TRO.2007.907479
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• QB. (2018, July 31). Retrieved from https://www.anybots.com
   Google Scholar
• Rae, I., Mutlu, B., & Takayama, L. (2014). Bodies in motion: Mobility, presence, and task awareness in telepresence. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual ACM Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 2153–2162), Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
   Google Scholar
• Rae, I., & Neustaedter, C. (2017). Robotic telepresence at scale. In Proceedings of the 2017 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 313–324). Denver, CO, USA: ACM.
   Google Scholar
• Rae, I., Venolia, G., Tang, J. C., & Molnar, D. (2015). A framework for understanding and designing telepresence. In Proceedings of the 18th ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing (pp. 1552–1566). ACM. doi: https://doi.org/10.3168/jds.2014-8796
   Google Scholar
• Rebola, C. B., & Eden, G. (2017). Remote robotic disability: Are we ready for robots? Interactions, 24(3), 48–53. doi:https://doi.org/10.1145/3086450
   Google Scholar
• Rudolph, A., Vaughn, J., Crego, N., Hueckel, R., Kuszajewski, M., Molloy, M., & Shaw, R. J. (2017). Integrating telepresence robots into nursing simulation. Nurse Educator, 42(2), E1–E4. doi:https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000000329
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schubert, T., Friedmann, F., & Regenbrecht, H. (2001). The experience of presence: Factor analytic insights. Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments, 10(3), 266–281. doi:https://doi.org/10.1162/105474601300343603
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shen, J., Xu, B., Pei, M., & Jia, Y. (2016). A low-cost tele-presence wheelchair system. In 2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (pp. 2452–2457), Daejeon, Korea.
   Google Scholar
• Shiroma, N., Sato, N., Chiu, Y., & Matsuno, F. (2004). Study on effective camera images for mobile robot teleoperation. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (pp. 107–112). doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcohol.2004.06.001
   Google Scholar
• Song, H., Kim, J., & Park, N. (2019). I know my professor: Teacher self-disclosure in online education and a mediating role of social presence. International Journal of Human–Computer Interaction, 35(6), 448–455. doi:https://doi.org/10.1080/10447318.2018.1455126
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thomas, L. C., & Wickens, C. D. (2000). Effects of display frames of reference on spatial judgments and change detection (Tech. Rep.). Illinois Univ at Urbana-Champaign Savoyaviation Research Lab.
   Google Scholar
• Tsui, K. M., Dlphond, J. M., Brooks, D. J., Medvedev, M. S., McCann, E., Allspaw, J., … Yanco, H. A. (2015). Accessible human-robot interaction for telepresence robots: A case study. Journal of Behavioral Robotics, 6(1), 1–29.
   Google Scholar
• Tsui, K. M., & Yanco, H. A. (2013). Design challenges and guidelines for social interaction using mobile telepresence robots. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 9(1), 227–301. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/1557234X13502462
   Google Scholar
• VGO. (2018, July 31). Retrieved from http://www.vgocom.com
   Google Scholar
• Voshell, M., Woods, D. D., & Phillips, F. (2005). Overcoming the keyhole in human-robot coordination: Simulation and evaluation. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting Proceedings, 49(3), 442–446. doi:https://doi.org/10.1177/154193120504900348
   Google Scholar
• Woods, D. D., Tittle, J., Feil, M., & Roesler, A. (2004). Envisioning human-robot coordination in future operations. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics – Part C: Applications and Reviews, 34(2), 210–218. doi:https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCC.2004.826272
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yanco, H. A., & Drury, J. (2004). “Where Am I?” Acquiring situation awareness using a remote robot platform. In 2004 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (IEEE Cat. No. 04CH37583) (Vol. 3, pp. 2835–2840), The Hague, Netherlands.
   Google Scholar
• Yang, L., Jones, B., Neustaedter, C., & Singhal, S. (2018). Shopping over distance through a telepresence robot. Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction, 2 (CSCW), 191:1–191: 18. doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3274460
   Google Scholar