[emcai] PhD Defense invitation - "How do robots become social? An empirical specification of the (non-)emergence of robots as social agents" - Damien Rudaz

[Damien Rudaz]

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 Télécom Paris (Amphi 6, Télécom Paris, 19 Place
Marguerite Perey, 91120 Palaiseau, France).

*Zoom link for the
defense: https://telecom-paris.zoom.us/j/93916757929?pwd=ZfT2TowiKJcxsc46Apchn7scPmGZX0.1
<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, Linköping University — Reviewer
   - Mme Heike BALDAUF-QUILLIATRE — Professor, Ecole Normale Supérieure de
   Lyon  — Examiner
   - M. Nicolas SABOURET — Professor, Université Paris-Saclay — Examiner
   - M. Reeves STUART — Associate Professor, University of
   Nottingham — Examiner
   - Mme Chloé MONDEME — Research Fellow, CNRS — Examiner
   - M. Christian LICOPPE — Professor, Télécom Paris — Thesis Supervisor
   - Mme Marine CHAMOUX  — HRI Software Engineering Manager, Aldebaran —
   Co-supervisor
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://conversationanalysis.org/pipermail/emcai_conversationanalysis.org/attachments/20240907/7d5ea27c/attachment-0001.html>