With increasing efficiency and reliability, autonomous systems are becoming valuable assistants to humans in various tasks. In the context of robot-assisted delivery, we investigate how robot performance and trust repair strategies impact human trust. In this task, while handling a secondary task, humans can choose to either send the robot to deliver autonomously or manually control it. The trust repair strategies examined include short and long explanations, apology and promise, and denial. Using data from human participants, we model human behavior using an Input-Output Hidden Markov Model (IOHMM) to capture the dynamics of trust and human action probabilities. Our findings indicate that humans are more likely to deploy the robot autonomously when their trust is high. Furthermore, state transition estimates show that long explanations are the most effective at repairing trust following a failure, while denial is most effective at preventing trust loss. We also demonstrate that the trust estimates generated by our model are isomorphic to self-reported trust values, making them interpretable. This model lays the groundwork for developing optimal policies that facilitate real-time adjustment of human trust in autonomous systems.

Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly used for planning tasks, offering unique capabilities not found in classical planners such as generating explanations and iterative refinement. However, trust--a critical factor in the adoption of planning systems--remains underexplored in the context of LLM-based planning tasks. This study bridges this gap by comparing human trust in LLM-based planners with classical planners through a user study in a Planning Domain Definition Language (PDDL) domain. Combining subjective measures, such as trust questionnaires, with objective metrics like evaluation accuracy, our findings reveal that correctness is the primary driver of trust and performance. Explanations provided by the LLM improved evaluation accuracy but had limited impact on trust, while plan refinement showed potential for increasing trust without significantly enhancing evaluation accuracy.

Human trust plays a crucial role in the effectiveness of human-robot collaboration. Despite its significance, the development and maintenance of an optimal trust level are obstructed by the complex nature of influencing factors and their mechanisms. This study investigates the effects of cognitive load on human trust within the context of a hybrid human-robot collaboration task. An experiment is conducted where the humans and the robot, acting as team members, collaboratively construct pyramids with differentiated levels of task complexity. Our findings reveal that cognitive load exerts diverse impacts on human trust in the robot. Notably, there is an increase in human trust under conditions of high cognitive load. Furthermore, the rewards for performance are substantially higher in tasks with high cognitive load compared to those with low cognitive load, and a significant correlation exists between human trust and the failure risk of performance in tasks with low and medium cognitive load. By integrating interdependent task steps, this research emphasizes the unique dynamics of hybrid human-robot collaboration scenarios. The insights gained not only contribute to understanding how cognitive load influences trust but also assist developers in optimizing collaborative target selection and designing more effective human-robot interfaces in such environments.

When interacting with each other, humans adjust their behavior based on perceived trust. However, to achieve similar adaptability, robots must accurately estimate human trust at sufficiently granular timescales during the human-robot collaboration task. A beta reputation is a popular way to formalize a mathematical estimation of human trust. However, it relies on binary performance, which updates trust estimations only after each task concludes. Additionally, manually crafting a reward function is the usual method of building a performance indicator, which is labor-intensive and time-consuming. These limitations prevent efficiently capturing continuous changes in trust at more granular timescales throughout the collaboration task. Therefore, this paper presents a new framework for the estimation of human trust using a beta reputation at fine-grained timescales. To achieve granularity in beta reputation, we utilize continuous reward values to update trust estimations at each timestep of a task. We construct a continuous reward function using maximum entropy optimization to eliminate the need for the laborious specification of a performance indicator. The proposed framework improves trust estimations by increasing accuracy, eliminating the need for manually crafting a reward function, and advancing toward developing more intelligent robots. The source code is publicly available. https://github.com/resuldagdanov/robot-learning-human-trust

Our goal is to model and experimentally assess trust evolution to predict future beliefs and behaviors of human-robot teams in dynamic environments. Research suggests that maintaining trust among team members in a human-robot team is vital for successful team performance. Research suggests that trust is a multi-dimensional and latent entity that relates to past experiences and future actions in a complex manner. Employing a human-robot collaborative task, we design an optimal assistance-seeking strategy for the robot using a POMDP framework. In the task, the human supervises an autonomous mobile manipulator collecting objects in an environment. The supervisor's task is to ensure that the robot safely executes its task. The robot can either choose to attempt to collect the object or seek human assistance. The human supervisor actively monitors the robot's activities, offering assistance upon request, and intervening if they perceive the robot may fail. In this setting, human trust is the hidden state, and the primary objective is to optimize team performance. We execute two sets of human-robot interaction experiments. The data from the first experiment are used to estimate POMDP parameters, which are used to compute an optimal assistance-seeking policy evaluated in the second experiment. The estimated POMDP parameters reveal that, for most participants, human intervention is more probable when trust is low, particularly in high-complexity tasks. Our estimates suggest that the robot's action of asking for assistance in high-complexity tasks can positively impact human trust. Our experimental results show that the proposed trust-aware policy is better than an optimal trust-agnostic policy. By comparing model estimates of human trust, obtained using only behavioral data, with the collected self-reported trust values, we show that model estimates are isomorphic to self-reported responses.

The emergence of Large Language Models (LLMs) has revealed a growing need for human-AI collaboration, especially in creative decision-making scenarios where trust and reliance are paramount. Through human studies and model evaluations on the open-ended News Headline Generation task from the LaMP benchmark, we analyze how the framing and presence of explanations affect user trust and model performance. Overall, we provide evidence that adding an explanation in the model response to justify its reasoning significantly increases self-reported user trust in the model when the user has the opportunity to compare various responses. Position and faithfulness of these explanations are also important factors. However, these gains disappear when users are shown responses independently, suggesting that humans trust all model responses, including deceptive ones, equitably when they are shown in isolation. Our findings urge future research to delve deeper into the nuanced evaluation of trust in human-machine teaming systems.

Shared autonomy functions as a flexible framework that empowers robots to operate across a spectrum of autonomy levels, allowing for efficient task execution with minimal human oversight. However, humans might be intimidated by the autonomous decision-making capabilities of robots due to perceived risks and a lack of trust. This paper proposed a trust-preserved shared autonomy strategy that grants robots to seamlessly adjust their autonomy level, striving to optimize team performance and enhance their acceptance among human collaborators. By enhancing the Relational Event Modeling framework with Bayesian learning techniques, this paper enables dynamic inference of human trust based solely on time-stamped relational events within human-robot teams. Adopting a longitudinal perspective on trust development and calibration in human-robot teams, the proposed shared autonomy strategy warrants robots to preserve human trust by not only passively adapting to it but also actively participating in trust repair when violations occur. We validate the effectiveness of the proposed approach through a user study on human-robot collaborative search and rescue scenarios. The objective and subjective evaluations demonstrate its merits over teleoperation on both task execution and user acceptability.

Recent work has considered trust-aware decision making for human-robot collaboration (HRC) with a focus on model learning. In this paper, we are interested in enabling the HRC system to complete complex tasks specified using temporal logic that involve human trust. Since human trust in robots is not observable, we adopt the widely used partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) framework for modelling the interactions between humans and robots. To specify the desired behaviour, we propose to use syntactically co-safe linear distribution temporal logic (scLDTL), a logic that is defined over predicates of states as well as belief states of partially observable systems. The incorporation of belief predicates in scLDTL enhances its expressiveness while simultaneously introducing added complexity. This also presents a new challenge as the belief predicates must be evaluated over the continuous (infinite) belief space. To address this challenge, we present an algorithm for solving the optimal policy synthesis problem. First, we enhance the belief MDP (derived by reformulating the POMDP) with a probabilistic labelling function. Then a product belief MDP is constructed between the probabilistically labelled belief MDP and the automaton translation of the scLDTL formula. Finally, we show that the optimal policy can be obtained by leveraging existing point-based value iteration algorithms with essential modifications. Human subject experiments with 21 participants on a driving simulator demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

Trust-aware human-robot interaction (HRI) has received increasing research attention, as trust has been shown to be a crucial factor for effective HRI. Research in trust-aware HRI discovered a dilemma -- maximizing task rewards often leads to decreased human trust, while maximizing human trust would compromise task performance. In this work, we address this dilemma by formulating the HRI process as a two-player Markov game and utilizing the reward-shaping technique to improve human trust while limiting performance loss. Specifically, we show that when the shaping reward is potential-based, the performance loss can be bounded by the potential functions evaluated at the final states of the Markov game. We apply the proposed framework to the experience-based trust model, resulting in a linear program that can be efficiently solved and deployed in real-world applications. We evaluate the proposed framework in a simulation scenario where a human-robot team performs a search-and-rescue mission. The results demonstrate that the proposed framework successfully modifies the robot's optimal policy, enabling it to increase human trust at a minimal task performance cost.

Artificial intelligence judging has become a reality. Last month, a Colombian judge used ChatGPT to generate part of his judicial opinion. Estonia has piloted a robot judge, and the United States. These recent events have sparked a debate about "unethical" uses of A.I. in the judiciary. As the technological hurdles to A.I.-judging recede, the remaining barriers are ones of law and ethics.