Modeling Human–Robot Proxemics Based on Human Communication Theory: A Behavior–Interaction–Object-Dependent Approach
Source abstract
Abstract
Understanding human comfort when in the presence of robots is vital to constructing socially adaptive robotic systems. This study introduces the Human–Robot Proxemic Index (HRPI). This quantitative model estimates user comfort based on three contextual dimensions: human activity (behavior-dependent, BD), interaction type (interaction-dependent, ID), and object characteristics (object-dependent, OD). Unlike previous proxemic models that focused solely on physical distance, HRPI integrates multidimensional contextual factors and applies sigmoid-based personalization to account for individual sensitivity. A ceiling-mounted service robot and nine participants took part in experiments. Pre- and post-interaction questionnaires were used to find out how comfortable the participants felt and what distance they preferred. The collected data were normalized and incorporated into HRPI through weighted assessment, and validation with ideal dummy data in trials showed that HRPI-based control dynamically adjusted the robot’s approach distance and speed according to user preferences. These findings highlight the strengths of HRPI as a multidimensional, context-aware framework for guiding socially appropriate robot movements and suggest that its integration with topological spatial mapping could further enhance human–robot collaboration in real-world environments.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Social Robot Interaction and HRI · Human-Automation Interaction and Safety · Action Observation and Synchronization
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Graduate School of Systems Design, Department of Mechanical System Engineering, Tokyo Metropolitan University, 6-6 Asahigaoka, Hino-shi 191-0065, Tokyo, Japan
Funding
the Japan Science and Technology Agency (JST), Moonshot R&D · TMU local 5G research
References (29)
Show source-provided references
1. Hall, E.T. (1990). The Hidden Dimension, Anchor Books. (Original work published 1966).
2. Eye-Contact, Distance And Affiliation10.2307/2786027 ↗
3. Burgoon, J.K., Guerrero, L.K., and Floyd, K. (2016). Nonverbal Communication, Routledge. [2nd ed.].10.4324/9781315663425 ↗
4. Kroczek, L.O.H., Pfaller, M., Lange, B., Müller, M., and Mühlberger, A. (2020). Interpersonal distance during real-time social interaction: Insights from subjective experience, behavior, and physiology. Front. Psychiatry, 11.10.3389/fpsyt.2020.00561 ↗
5. Distance matters: Physical space and social impact10.1177/0146167295218002 ↗
6. Walters, M.L., Dautenhahn, K., Woods, S.N., Koay, K.L., Nehaniv, C.L., Lee, D., Boekhorst, R.T., and Syrdal, D.S. (2009). An empirical framework for human–robot proxemics. Proc. AISB Symp., 144–149. Available online: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277290091_An_Empirical_Framework_for_Human-Robot_Proxemics.
7. Mumm, J., and Mutlu, B. (2011, January 6–9). Human–robot proxemics: Physical and psychological distancing in human–robot interaction. Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction—HRI’11, Lausanne, Switzerland.10.1145/1957656.1957786 ↗
8. Takayama, L., and Pantofaru, C. (2009, January 10–15). Influences on proxemic behaviors in human–robot interaction. Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS 2009), St. Louis, MO, USA.10.1109/IROS.2009.5354145 ↗
9. Robots have needs too: How and why people adapt their proxemic behavior to improve robot social signal understanding10.5898/JHRI.5.2.Mead ↗
10. Neggers, M.M.E., Cuijpers, R.H., Ruijten, P.A.M., and IJsselsteijn, W.A. (2022). The effect of robot speed on comfortable passing distances. Front. Robot. AI, 9.10.3389/frobt.2022.915972 ↗
11. A study of human proxemics on social robot light effects
12. Moujahid, M., Robb, D.A., Dondrup, C., and Hastie, H. (2023, January 28–31). Come closer: The effects of robot personality on human proxemics behaviours. Proceedings of the 32nd IEEE International Conference on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), Busan, Republic of Korea.10.1109/RO-MAN57019.2023.10309333 ↗
13. Leoste, J., Väljataga, T., Ley, T., Normak, P., and Tammets, K. (2023). Keeping distance with a telepresence robot: A pilot study. Front. Educ., 7.10.3389/feduc.2022.1046461 ↗
14. Anthropomorphism: Opportunities and challenges in human–robot interaction10.1007/s12369-014-0267-6 ↗
15. Robot tears promote psychological anthropomorphism and empathy
16. Design of a Parametric Model of Personal Space for Robotic Social Navigation10.1007/s12369-013-0188-9 ↗
17. Understanding human–robot proxemic norms in construction: How do humans navigate around robots?10.1016/j.autcon.2024.105455 ↗
18. Samarakoon, S.M.B.P., Muthugala, M.A.V.J., and Jayasekara, A.G.B.P. (2022). A review on human–robot proxemics. Electronics, 11.10.3390/electronics11162490 ↗
19. Exploring tasks and challenges in human–robot collaborative systems
20. Towards a more anthropomorphic interaction with robots in museum settings: An experimental study10.1016/j.robot.2023.104561 ↗
21. Yang, Q., Kachel, L., Jung, M., Al-Hamadi, A., and Wachsmuth, S. (2025). Learning human–robot proxemics models from experimental data. Electronics, 14.10.3390/electronics14183704 ↗
22. Multiple fuzzy state-value functions for human evaluation through interactive trajectory planning of a partner robot10.1007/s00500-005-0015-9 ↗
23. A meta-analysis of factors affecting trust in human–robot interaction10.1177/0018720811417254 ↗
24. A systematic review of trust assessments in human–robot interaction10.1145/3706123 ↗
25. Trust in socially assistive robots: Considerations for use in rehabilitation10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.07.014 ↗
26. Estimation of object handover position using human–robot proxemics and unsupervised pattern recognition10.20965/jaciii.2024.p0371 ↗
27. Kubota, N. (2022, January 17–19). Multiscopic topological twin in trailer living laboratory: Plenary talk. Proceedings of the 2022 IEEE 22nd International Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Informatics and 8th IEEE International Conference on Recent Achievements in Mechatronics, Automation, Computer Science and Robotics (CINTI-MACRo), Budapest, Hungary.10.1109/CINTI-MACRo57952.2022.10029665 ↗
28. Rossi, S., Ercolano, G., Raggioli, L., Savino, E., and Ruocco, M. (2018, January 27–31). The disappearing robot: An analysis of disengagement and distraction during non-interactive tasks. Proceedings of the 2018 27th IEEE International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication (RO-MAN), Nanjing, China.10.1109/ROMAN.2018.8525514 ↗
29. Bishop, C.M. (2006). Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning, Springer.