From damien.rudaz at gmail.com Sat Sep 7 02:29:52 2024 From: damien.rudaz at gmail.com (Damien Rudaz) Date: Sat, 7 Sep 2024 10:29:52 +0200 Subject: [emcai] PhD Defense invitation - "How do robots become social? An empirical specification of the (non-)emergence of robots as social agents" - Damien Rudaz Message-ID: Dear EMCA-AI network members, I am pleased to invite you to my thesis defense, entitled *"How do robots become social? An empirical specification of the (non-)emergence of robots as social agents"* This defense will take place on *Thursday, September 12, 2024, at 2:00 PM CET* in person at T?l?com Paris (Amphi 6, T?l?com Paris, 19 Place Marguerite Perey, 91120 Palaiseau, France). *Zoom link for the defense: https://telecom-paris.zoom.us/j/93916757929?pwd=ZfT2TowiKJcxsc46Apchn7scPmGZX0.1 * The presentation will be *in English* *No registration is needed *to attend the defense. Those wishing to attend online can simply connect on the Zoom link (and, naturally, disconnect) at any point during the defense. For those attending in person, a small reception will follow the defense in room 0D20. Please find the full abstract at the end of this email. Best regards, Damien RUDAZ / *Abstract:* As opposed to viewing the inner workings of human-robot interactions (HRI) as black boxes, this work investigates the finely tuned micro-interactional practices through which a robot emerges as a ?social agent? in different settings. Using the micro-analytic approach of Ethnomethodological Conversation Analysis (EMCA), it examines several large corpora of encounters between humans and the humanoid robot Pepper. Their exploration allows us to broaden the list of documented interactional processes occurring during human-robot encounters (indexed to specific settings, sequential contexts, spatial configurations, etc.) by which a robot can be said to be, momentarily and locally, treated as an ?agent? in a social interaction. Attending to the moment-by-moment production of the robot?s status as a practical accomplishment leads our inquiry to a respecification of the interactional work commonly glossed by the lay use of the term ?social robot?. However, rather than merely a quietist attempt at clarifying conceptual mix-ups, our approach responds to design, ergonomic, and user experience (UX) concerns regarding ?social? robots. That is, by attending to the locally organized practices taking place in human-robot encounters, we attempt to provide a different type of explanation as to ?what went wrong? or ?what went right? in an interaction with a robot: explanations based on the features made relevant by the participants themselves as they are practically immersed within the urgency of these ongoing human-robot interactions. *Composition of the jury:* - Mme Karola PITSCH ? Professor, University of Duisburg-Essen ? Reviewer - M. Mathias BROTH ? Professor, Link?ping University ? Reviewer - Mme Heike BALDAUF-QUILLIATRE ? Professor, Ecole Normale Sup?rieure de Lyon ? Examiner - M. Nicolas SABOURET ? Professor, Universit? Paris-Saclay ? Examiner - M. Reeves STUART ? Associate Professor, University of Nottingham ? Examiner - Mme Chlo? MONDEME ? Research Fellow, CNRS ? Examiner - M. Christian LICOPPE ? Professor, T?l?com Paris ? Thesis Supervisor - Mme Marine CHAMOUX ? HRI Software Engineering Manager, Aldebaran ? Co-supervisor -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tommaso.colombino at naverlabs.com Mon Sep 23 03:10:38 2024 From: tommaso.colombino at naverlabs.com (=?utf-8?B?VG9tbWFzbyBDT0xPTUJJTk8=?=) Date: Mon, 23 Sep 2024 18:10:38 +0900 Subject: [emcai] =?utf-8?q?Human_Robot_Interaction_Symposium_at_Naver_Lab?= =?utf-8?q?s_Europe?= Message-ID: <3668525b6316bf85fae94269a75b572@fvweb01.nmdf> Dear network members, I would like to draw your attention to a workshop / symposium Naver Labs Europe is organizing in Grenoble on November 14 and 15. While our research lab is mainly focused on AI for robotics, we have a small but dedicated HRI team with some background in Ethnomethodology and a strong focus on qualitative / observational approaches. This symposium is in its second edition and we organise it to bring focus on real-life application and challenges in robotics within a research environment that is otherwise heavily focused on machine learning and simulation. You can find the program of the symposium here: 2nd HRI International Symposium - Naver Labs Europe While it is not overtly an EMCA event, you may find names among the speakers that are familiar, like Barry Brown. The event is mainly intended to be in-presence, but there will be live streaming for remote attendees and registration is free. We are also calling for poster submissions, so if you have students that would like an opportunity to present their work to and network with some very accomplished HRI scholars, we offer a 400 euro travel budget for accepted submissions. It does not need to be unpublished work. I would very much like to have a strong EMCA presence at the event, and hope to see some of you there either in presence or virtually. Best wishes, Tommaso Colombino This email and the information contained in this email are intended solely for the recipient(s) addressed above and may contain information that is confidential and/or privileged or whose disclosure is prohibited by law or other reasons. If you are not the intended recipient of this email, please be advised that any unauthorized storage, duplication, dissemination, distribution or disclosure of all or part of this email is strictly prohibited. If you received this email in error, please immediately contact NAVER Security (dl_naversecurity at navercorp.com) and delete this email and any copies and attachments from your system. Thank you for your cooperation. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From lynn.derijk at ru.nl Fri Sep 27 02:00:16 2024 From: lynn.derijk at ru.nl (Rijk, L.E.M. de (Lynn)) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 08:00:16 +0000 Subject: [emcai] EMCA/AI network - Reminder meeting today Message-ID: Dear EMCA/AI network members, Hereby a reminder that we have our first session after summer break today, from 12.30-14.00 CET at: https://liu-se.zoom.us/j/62999036262 For new members to the list, you can find the dates for upcoming events here (more details will be added and will also follow by mail): https://emcai.conversationanalysis.org/events/ We hope to see many of you this afternoon! And again many thanks to Damien for preparing all of this (see details of this session below). Best wishes, Lynn, Hannah and Saul Session details - 27 September The last EMCAI session outlined several interesting ?assumptions? on what constitutes ?interaction? in ?human-robot interaction? or ?human-VUI interaction?. Because the discussion was still lively when time ran out, we invite you to join us for one final session on the very same topic: What do ?we? (EMCA researchers, non-EMCA-oriented HRI researchers, engineers, designers, tech companies' employees, etc.) respectively index when we formulate phrases such as ?conversing with a robot?, ?interacting with a vocal agent?, etc.? Outlined below is a tentative list of the prominent assumptions debated last time. Some of those assumptions may prevail in ?the industry? (i.e., in private companies working on commercial robots or VUIs), while others may be at the core of different disciplines in HRI/HCI academic research. Some might be documented across multiple papers and fields, while others might still remain unexplored. 1. Human-robot interaction as "information transfer" rather than "dealing with practical problems in situated activities". 2. Human-robot interaction as questions and answers ? a focus on turns' ?composition? over turns' ?position?. 3. Human-robot interaction as non-contingent, definite, and exhaustively describable ? the definiteness of reality and the possibility of its description rather than the "essential vagueness" of social life. 4. Human-robot Conversation as a practical achievement that it is pointless to reconstruct analytically (e.g., using CA) to, then, extract a set of granular guidelines or rules ? conversational design as "gut feeling?. 5. Human-robot interaction as interactions with machines and not interactions that involve machines ? ?human-machine coupling? rather than "interaction" in a situated and holistic sense. 1) For the next session: To expand, correct, or refine this brief preliminary list, we invite you to prepare any data that you would like to discuss (articles, videos, documents, etc.) and that may exemplify a common assumption about ?human-robot interaction? or ?human-VUI interaction?. Our intention is not to have a debate on ?interaction? as a concept, but to investigate what is indexed by different HRI actors as an ?interaction?, and to explore if these assumptions impact the design of robots or VUIs ? as well as the tools used to design or program them. For example, do these assumptions find their way into the most recent conversational technologies, such as chatbots based on large language models like chatGPT? And if so, what evidence can substantiate these claims? We would love to discuss any data you might want to present, even tangentially related to these topics. 2) As a starting point, the candidate assumptions discussed during our previous session have been tentatively mapped onto a Miro board. This Miro board lays out assumptions that were hypothesized to be prevailing in HRI, as well as alternative positions that contrasted with those prevailing assumptions: - https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVK73KAOQ=/?share_link_id=886506295959 -Password: assumptions We will try to use this board as a basis for our discussions next time. In the meanwhile, we invite you to modify this collaborative Miro board as you see fit. Feel free to add, modify, or move assumptions, contrasting assumptions, comments, criticism, questions, empirical data, or to draw new clusters around the preexisting sticky notes. Similarly, do not hesitate to heavily update the Miro board if you think about better organizing principles or if you have more catchy names for existing assumptions. (For those who participated in our last session, sorry in advance if we miscategorized your verbatims!) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jakub.mlynar at gmail.com Fri Sep 27 03:22:38 2024 From: jakub.mlynar at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?SmFrdWIgTWx5bsOhxZk=?=) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 11:22:38 +0200 Subject: [emcai] EMCA/AI network - Reminder meeting today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Hello everyone, thank you -- looking forward to meeting you all very soon! I just realized that we haven't properly circulated the news that the scoping review of EMCA studies of AI -- written together with the network members Lynn de Rijk, Andreas Liesenfeld, Wyke Stommel & Saul Albert, and discussed some time ago in one of the EMCA-AI network meetings -- has been recently published in the journal *AI & Society *(open access): https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00146-024-01919-x Many thanks again for all your feedback and comments that have enabled us to improve the paper! All the best, Jakub p? 27. 9. 2024 v 10:00 odes?latel Rijk, L.E.M. de (Lynn) via emcai < emcai at conversationanalysis.org> napsal: > Dear EMCA/AI network members, > > > > Hereby a reminder that we have our first session after summer break today, > from 12.30-14.00 CET at: https://liu-se.zoom.us/j/62999036262 > > For new members to the list, you can find the dates for upcoming events > here (more details will be added and will also follow by mail): > https://emcai.conversationanalysis.org/events/ > > > > We hope to see many of you this afternoon! And again many thanks to > Damien for preparing all of this (see details of this session below). > > > > Best wishes, > > Lynn, Hannah and Saul > > > > > > *Session details - 27 September* > > The last EMCAI session outlined several interesting ?assumptions? on what > constitutes ?interaction? in ?human-robot interaction? or ?human-VUI > interaction?. Because the discussion was still lively when time ran out, we > invite you to join us for one final session on the very same topic: *What > do ?we? (EMCA researchers, non-EMCA-oriented HRI researchers, engineers, > designers, tech companies' employees, etc.) respectively index when we > formulate phrases such as ?conversing with a robot?, ?interacting with a > vocal agent?, etc.?* > > > > Outlined below is a tentative list of the prominent assumptions debated > last time. Some of those assumptions may prevail in ?the industry? (i.e., > in private companies working on commercial robots or VUIs), while others > may be at the core of different disciplines in HRI/HCI academic research. > Some might be documented across multiple papers and fields, while others > might still remain unexplored. > > 1. *Human-robot interaction as "information transfer" *rather than > "dealing with practical problems in situated activities". > 2. *Human-robot interaction as questions and answers *? a focus on > turns' ?composition? over turns' ?position?. > 3. *Human-robot interaction as non-contingent, definite, and > exhaustively describable *? the definiteness of reality and the > possibility of its description rather than the "essential vagueness" of > social life. > 4. *Human-robot Conversation as a practical achievement that it is > pointless to reconstruct analytically* (e.g., using CA) to, then, > extract a set of granular guidelines or rules ? conversational design as > "gut feeling?. > 5. *Human-robot interaction as interactions with machines and not > interactions that involve machines* ? ?human-machine coupling? rather > than "interaction" in a situated and holistic sense. > > *1) For the next session*: To expand, correct, or refine this brief > preliminary list, we invite you to prepare any data that you would like to > discuss (articles, videos, documents, etc.) and that may exemplify a common > assumption about ?human-robot interaction? or ?human-VUI interaction?. Our > intention is not to have a debate on ?interaction? as a concept, but to > investigate what is indexed by different HRI actors as an ?interaction?, > and to explore if these assumptions impact the design of robots or VUIs ? > as well as the tools used to design or program them. For example, do these > assumptions find their way into the most recent conversational > technologies, such as chatbots based on large language models like chatGPT? > And if so, what evidence can substantiate these claims? We would love to > discuss any data you might want to present, even tangentially related to > these topics. > > > > *2) As a starting point, *the candidate assumptions discussed during our > previous session have been tentatively mapped onto a Miro board. This Miro > board lays out assumptions that were hypothesized to be prevailing in HRI, > as well as alternative positions that contrasted with those prevailing > assumptions: > > - https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVK73KAOQ=/?share_link_id=886506295959 > > > -Password: assumptions > > We will try to use this board as a basis for our discussions next time. In > the meanwhile, we invite you to modify this collaborative Miro board as you > see fit. Feel free to add, modify, or move assumptions, contrasting > assumptions, comments, criticism, questions, empirical data, or to draw new > clusters around the preexisting sticky notes. Similarly, do not hesitate to > heavily update the Miro board if you think about better organizing > principles or if you have more catchy names for existing assumptions. (For > those who participated in our last session, sorry in advance if we > miscategorized your verbatims!) > > > > > -- > emcai mailing list > emcai at conversationanalysis.org > > http://conversationanalysis.org/mailman/listinfo/emcai_conversationanalysis.org > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: 2024--Mlynar&deRijk&Liesenfeld&Stommel&Albert_-_AISituatedAction.pdf Type: application/pdf Size: 1193218 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Stuart.Reeves at nottingham.ac.uk Fri Sep 27 04:09:28 2024 From: Stuart.Reeves at nottingham.ac.uk (Stuart Reeves) Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2024 10:09:28 +0000 Subject: [emcai] EMCA/AI network - Reminder meeting today In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <8E199D62-0869-40F9-8FE8-B9A1614BB0FD@nottingham.ac.uk> Sending apologies to all - would very much like to be there but have other duties today :( Thanks to you all as a team for keeping this network going! > On 27 Sep 2024, at 09:00, Rijk, L.E.M. de (Lynn) via emcai wrote: > > Dear EMCA/AI network members, > Hereby a reminder that we have our first session after summer break today, from 12.30-14.00 CET at: https://liu-se.zoom.us/j/62999036262 > For new members to the list, you can find the dates for upcoming events here (more details will be added and will also follow by mail): https://emcai.conversationanalysis.org/events/ > We hope to see many of you this afternoon! And again many thanks to Damien for preparing all of this (see details of this session below). > Best wishes, > Lynn, Hannah and Saul > Session details - 27 September > The last EMCAI session outlined several interesting ?assumptions? on what constitutes ?interaction? in ?human-robot interaction? or ?human-VUI interaction?. Because the discussion was still lively when time ran out, we invite you to join us for one final session on the very same topic: What do ?we? (EMCA researchers, non-EMCA-oriented HRI researchers, engineers, designers, tech companies' employees, etc.) respectively index when we formulate phrases such as ?conversing with a robot?, ?interacting with a vocal agent?, etc.? > Outlined below is a tentative list of the prominent assumptions debated last time. Some of those assumptions may prevail in ?the industry? (i.e., in private companies working on commercial robots or VUIs), while others may be at the core of different disciplines in HRI/HCI academic research. Some might be documented across multiple papers and fields, while others might still remain unexplored. > ? Human-robot interaction as "information transfer" rather than "dealing with practical problems in situated activities". > ? Human-robot interaction as questions and answers ? a focus on turns' ?composition? over turns' ?position?. > ? Human-robot interaction as non-contingent, definite, and exhaustively describable ? the definiteness of reality and the possibility of its description rather than the "essential vagueness" of social life. > ? Human-robot Conversation as a practical achievement that it is pointless to reconstruct analytically (e.g., using CA) to, then, extract a set of granular guidelines or rules ? conversational design as "gut feeling?. > ? Human-robot interaction as interactions with machines and not interactions that involve machines ? ?human-machine coupling? rather than "interaction" in a situated and holistic sense. > 1) For the next session: To expand, correct, or refine this brief preliminary list, we invite you to prepare any data that you would like to discuss (articles, videos, documents, etc.) and that may exemplify a common assumption about ?human-robot interaction? or ?human-VUI interaction?. Our intention is not to have a debate on ?interaction? as a concept, but to investigate what is indexed by different HRI actors as an ?interaction?, and to explore if these assumptions impact the design of robots or VUIs ? as well as the tools used to design or program them. For example, do these assumptions find their way into the most recent conversational technologies, such as chatbots based on large language models like chatGPT? And if so, what evidence can substantiate these claims? We would love to discuss any data you might want to present, even tangentially related to these topics. > 2) As a starting point, the candidate assumptions discussed during our previous session have been tentatively mapped onto a Miro board. This Miro board lays out assumptions that were hypothesized to be prevailing in HRI, as well as alternative positions that contrasted with those prevailing assumptions: > - https://miro.com/app/board/uXjVK73KAOQ=/?share_link_id=886506295959 > -Password: assumptions > We will try to use this board as a basis for our discussions next time. In the meanwhile, we invite you to modify this collaborative Miro board as you see fit. Feel free to add, modify, or move assumptions, contrasting assumptions, comments, criticism, questions, empirical data, or to draw new clusters around the preexisting sticky notes. Similarly, do not hesitate to heavily update the Miro board if you think about better organizing principles or if you have more catchy names for existing assumptions. (For those who participated in our last session, sorry in advance if we miscategorized your verbatims!) > -- > emcai mailing list > emcai at conversationanalysis.org > http://conversationanalysis.org/mailman/listinfo/emcai_conversationanalysis.org Stuart Reeves | Mixed Reality Lab, School of Computer Science (C15), University of Nottingham http://www.cs.nott.ac.uk/~str This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have received this message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored where permitted by law.