Robot actions influence the decisions of nearby humans. Here influence refers to intentional change: robots influence humans when they shift the human's behavior in a way that helps the robot complete its task. Imagine an autonomous car trying to merge; by proactively nudging into the human's lane, the robot causes human drivers to yield and provide space. Influence is often necessary for seamless interaction. However, if influence is left unregulated and uncontrolled, robots will negatively impact the humans around them. Prior works have begun to address this problem by creating a variety of control algorithms that seek to influence humans. Although these methods are effective in the short-term, they fail to maintain influence over time as the human adapts to the robot's behaviors. In this paper we therefore present an optimization framework that enables robots to purposely regulate their influence over humans across both short-term and long-term interactions. Here the robot maintains its influence by reasoning over a dynamic human model which captures how the robot's current choices will impact the human's future behavior. Our resulting framework serves to unify current approaches: we demonstrate that state-of-the-art methods are simplifications of our underlying formalism. Our framework also provides a principled way to generate influential policies: in the best case the robot exactly solves our framework to find optimal, influential behavior. But when solving this optimization problem becomes impractical, designers can introduce their own simplifications to reach tractable approximations. We experimentally compare our unified framework to state-of-the-art baselines and ablations, and demonstrate across simulations and user studies that this framework is able to successfully influence humans over repeated interactions. See videos of our experiments here: https://youtu.be/nPekTUfUEbo

Imitation learning enables robots to learn new tasks from human examples. One current fundamental limitation while learning from humans is causal confusion. Causal confusion occurs when the robot's observations include both task-relevant and extraneous information: for instance, a robot's camera might see not only the intended goal, but also clutter and changes in lighting within its environment. Because the robot does not know which aspects of its observations are important a priori, it often misinterprets the human's examples and fails to learn the desired task. To address this issue, we highlight that -- while the robot learner may not know what to focus on -- the human teacher does. In this paper we propose that the human proactively marks key parts of their task with small, lightweight beacons. Under our framework the human attaches these beacons to task-relevant objects before providing demonstrations: as the human shows examples of the task, beacons track the position of marked objects. We then harness this offline beacon data to train a task-relevant state embedding. Specifically, we embed the robot's observations to a latent state that is correlated with the measured beacon readings: in practice, this causes the robot to autonomously filter out extraneous observations and make decisions based on features learned from the beacon data. Our simulations and a real robot experiment suggest that this framework for human-placed beacons mitigates causal confusion and enables robots to learn the desired task from fewer demonstrations. See videos here: https://youtu.be/oy85xJvtLSU

Assistive robot arms can help humans by partially automating their desired tasks. Consider an adult with motor impairments controlling an assistive robot arm to eat dinner. The robot can reduce the number of human inputs -- and how precise those inputs need to be -- by recognizing what the human wants (e.g., a fork) and assisting for that task (e.g., moving towards the fork). Prior research has largely focused on learning the human's task and providing meaningful assistance. But as the robot learns and assists, we also need to ensure that the human understands the robot's intent (e.g., does the human know the robot is reaching for a fork?). In this paper, we study the effects of communicating learned assistance from the robot back to the human operator. We do not focus on the specific interfaces used for communication. Instead, we develop experimental and theoretical models of a) how communication changes the way humans interact with assistive robot arms, and b) how robots can harness these changes to better align with the human's intent. We first conduct online and in-person user studies where participants operate robots that provide partial assistance, and we measure how the human's inputs change with and without communication. With communication, we find that humans are more likely to intervene when the robot incorrectly predicts their intent, and more likely to release control when the robot correctly understands their task. We then use these findings to modify an established robot learning algorithm so that the robot can correctly interpret the human's inputs when communication is present. Our results from a second in-person user study suggest that this combination of communication and learning outperforms assistive systems that isolate either learning or communication.

When humans interact with robots influence is inevitable. Consider an autonomous car driving near a human: the speed and steering of the autonomous car will affect how the human drives. Prior works have developed frameworks that enable robots to influence humans towards desired behaviors. But while these approaches are effective in the short-term (i.e., the first few human-robot interactions), here we explore long-term influence (i.e., repeated interactions between the same human and robot). Our central insight is that humans are dynamic: people adapt to robots, and behaviors which are influential now may fall short once the human learns to anticipate the robot's actions. With this insight, we experimentally demonstrate that a prevalent game-theoretic formalism for generating influential robot behaviors becomes less effective over repeated interactions. Next, we propose three modifications to Stackelberg games that make the robot's policy both influential and unpredictable. We finally test these modifications across simulations and user studies: our results suggest that robots which purposely make their actions harder to anticipate are better able to maintain influence over long-term interaction. See videos here: https://youtu.be/ydO83cgjZ2Q

We often assume that robots which collaborate with humans should behave in ways that are transparent (e.g., legible, explainable). These transparent robots intentionally choose actions that convey their internal state to nearby humans: for instance, a transparent robot might exaggerate its trajectory to indicate its goal. But while transparent behavior seems beneficial for human-robot interaction, is it actually optimal? In this paper we consider collaborative settings where the human and robot have the same objective, and the human is uncertain about the robot's type (i.e., the robot's internal state). We extend a recursive combination of Bayesian Nash equilibrium and the Bellman equation to solve for optimal robot policies. Interestingly, we discover that it is not always optimal for collaborative robots to be transparent; instead, human and robot teams can sometimes achieve higher rewards when the robot is opaque. In contrast to transparent robots, opaque robots select actions that withhold information from the human. Our analysis suggests that opaque behavior becomes optimal when either (a) human-robot interactions have a short time horizon or (b) users are slow to learn from the robot's actions. We extend this theoretical analysis to user studies across 43 total participants in both online and in-person settings. We find that -- during short interactions -- users reach higher rewards when working with opaque partners, and subjectively rate opaque robots as about equal to transparent robots. See videos of our experiments here: https://youtu.be/u8q1Z7WHUuI