arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2407.06094

ERR@HRI 2024 Challenge: Multimodal Detection of Errors and Failures in Human-Robot Interactions

Abstract

Despite the recent advancements in robotics and machine learning (ML), the deployment of autonomous robots in our everyday lives is still an open challenge. This is due to multiple reasons among which are their frequent mistakes, such as interrupting people or having delayed responses, as well as their limited ability to understand human speech, i.e., failure in tasks like transcribing speech to text. These mistakes may disrupt interactions and negatively influence human perception of these robots. To address this problem, robots need to have the ability to detect human-robot interaction (HRI) failures. The ERR@HRI 2024 challenge tackles this by offering a benchmark multimodal dataset of robot failures during human-robot interactions (HRI), encouraging researchers to develop and benchmark multimodal machine learning models to detect these failures. We created a dataset featuring multimodal non-verbal interaction data, including facial, speech, and pose features from video clips of interactions with a robotic coach, annotated with labels indicating the presence or absence of robot mistakes, user awkwardness, and interaction ruptures, allowing for the training and evaluation of predictive models. Challenge participants have been invited to submit their multimodal ML models for detection of robot errors and to be evaluated against various performance metrics such as accuracy, precision, recall, F1 score, with and without a margin of error reflecting the time-sensitivity of these metrics. The results of this challenge will help the research field in better understanding the robot failures in human-robot interactions and designing autonomous robots that can mitigate their own errors after successfully detecting them.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Micol Spitale, Maria Teresa Parreira, Maia Stiber, Minja Axelsson, Neval Kara, Garima Kankariya, Chien-Ming Huang, Malte Jung, Wendy Ju, Hatice Gunes. 2024-07-08. ERR@HRI 2024 Challenge: Multimodal Detection of Errors and Failures in Human-Robot Interactions. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.06094

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