ArticlePDF Available
A Motion Mapping System for Humanoids that Provides Immersive
Teleprescence Experiences
Carlos Girard1, Diego Calderon1, Ali Lemus1, Victor Ferman2and Julio Fajardo1,2
Abstract Motion capture and mapping systems have been
evolving to enhance the virtual immersion experience in a
human-in-the-loop model. In this work, a motion mapping
system composed by a 3D printed humanoid robot, built
with low-cost materials, an IMU-based motion capture suit, a
binaural microphone and a virtual reality headset is presented.
The movements of the robot are limited by its reduced amount
of degrees of freedom, particularly due to its shoulder con-
figuration, which differs from the human’s own biomechanics.
Once the motion capture suit’s information is extracted, a ROS-
based architecture maps orientations from the user to obtain
the generalized coordinates of the robot in order to imitate
the operator’s arm’s motion. Additionally, the headset is used
to project a stereo vision of the robot’s surroundings and to
map the operator’s head motion. Furthermore, the microphones
located on each ear provide the ability to capture 3D sound. This
project intends to provide an interactive telepresence puppetry
system to encourage the involvement of a targeted audience on
engineering subjects. The system shows acceptable results with
moderate time response.
Motion control in the field of humanoid robots has been
approached with many techniques that involve a vast variety
of motion tracking and detection implementations. Since the
beginning of robotics, the topic of developing human shaped
robots has been a great challenge for engineering, because
of the problems that involve replicating human movements,
as well as the right acquisition of motion measurements
from a human. Therefore, a lot of algorithms and devices
had to shape the path for stable and robust systems that
can accomplish these goals with acceptable results. One
of the first attempts to harness humanoid control was by
developing the inverse kinematics models and motion capture
(MoCap) systems using cameras [1]. Moreover, having a
control system to determine the position of the end effector
of a robot is essential for critical applications like surgery
assistance where there are human lives at risk [2]. In other
applications, such as teleoperated robotic arms, it exists a
greater interest on replicating the orientation of the robot
links rather than track the cartesian coordinates of the end
effector, all this, in the sake that the operator can work more
conveniently and intuitively [3].
Furthermore, as telepresence continues expanding to new
applications, humanoid robots have been recently added to
more immersive forms of human interaction.
1Authors are with Turing Research Laboratory, FISICC,
Universidad Galileo, Guatemala City, Guatemala, email:
2Authors are with Department of Computer Engineering and In-
dustrial Automation, FEEC, UNICAMP, Campinas, SP, Brazil, e-mail:
The use of virtual reality (VR) headsets can provide the
user with a wide view of the information received by the
robot’s eye-cameras [4]. However, with this principle, comes
the problem of latency from the stereo images perceived by
the human eyes, producing motion sickness if the frame rate
is low or if the images are not well synchronized. Hence,
the proper selection of image resolution and frame rate can
mitigate those problems [5].
In previous implementations, humanoid robots were de-
signed as attractions on thematic parks with the aim to
produce attractions that resemble the human movements,
triggering the intention to make a new kind of human-like
puppets that can be operated with body movements. Conse-
quently, the methods to acquire human actions were always
following the limbs’ path’s using cameras with certain track
points around human body or using motion sensor suits [6,7].
Both approaches have been constantly improved to achieve
better and more robust modes of operation. Furthermore,
the entertainment industry remains interested in teleoperation
and MoCap systems, because the video games and the-
matic parks are significantly profitable and direct significant
resources to generating more research opportunities [8,9].
Otherwise, the use of MoCap systems has grown in other
fields such as physiotherapy, where a humanoid robot can
provide mechanical assistance to patients [10,11]. The use
of Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU) based MoCap systems
brings benefits like more information for the interaction be-
tween human and robot. Moreover, IMUs contribute with an
enhanced representation of each joint (once well calibrated),
due to the movement being mapped by a mechanical action
and not inferred by a visual model [12].
After achieving a stable motion mapping system, it was
possible to think of applications for education and make
it accessible for low-income universities to have affordable
humanoid robots for their students [13]. On the other hand,
it is also reasonable to think new applications for thematic
parks or develop human-robot collaborative environments
that promote robotic services, aided by virtual reality envi-
ronments that deliver a more vivid experience. The concept
of using humanoid robots to involve people on the robotics
field sometimes awakes curiosity and desire to develop more
interactive projects of engineering. As a matter of fact, virtual
reality devices like the Vibe, HoloLens and Oculus Rift have
brought great solutions to head motion tracking and stereo
vision, this type of devices have become mainstream, not
only for entertainment but also for research applications [14].
Considering that VR headsets like the Oculus Rift offer an
easy solution to obtain the head orientation of a human
Fig. 1. The robot with an operator wearing the motion capture system.
operator and, without any mayor processing, send it to a
robots’ head actuators, not only to imitate its motion, but
also to provide a system based on a telepresence system.
This work presents Leonardo GreenMoov, a telepresence
humanoid robot that is controlled through a MoCap suit,
built with low-cost materials and based on the InMoov
project [15]. Furthermore, the robot mapping problem for this
specific case is solved using forward and inverse kinematics
techniques to deal with the differences, generated by the
joint configuration, between the robot’s and operator’s arms.
Moreover, the head of the robot has two high definition
cameras, whose images are projected in the Oculus Rift
DK2 headset alongside binaural microphones, which provide
the teleoperator the sensation of immersion in the environ-
ment where the robot is at. Thereby, the system brings a
customized experience, interacting with a targeted audience
through a telepresence puppetry system [16]; guiding and
entertaining people in places like universities, theaters, the-
matic parks, malls and museums, in counterpart to the role of
automated receptionist such as works described in [17,18].
The rest of this work is organized as follows: Section II
describes the functions and components that are part of
the telepresence system. In Section III, forward and inverse
kinematics are explained to give a better understanding of
how the problem of robot mapping was approached. Finally,
the Sections IV and V list the experimental results and
conclusions obtained through simulations and the use of the
system in real scenarios.
A modular system is proposed in order to control the robot
remotely, as well as enabling or disabling specific modules
depending on the user’s needs (teleoperated or automatic
mode). First, the system is composed by the Axis Neuron Pro
(MoCap System Software), which is the only way to extract
the information from the MoCap suit and it is available for
Windows and macOS but not for Linux based distributions;
the first option was chosen to keep the cost as low as
The humanoid robot uses a Pine A64 2GB single-board
computer (SBC) with Ubuntu MATE 16.04, which runs the
Fig. 2. Block diagram of the system architecture implemented.
master and other nodes of Robot Operating System (ROS)
Kinetic to implement the robot mapping and Leonardo’s
Controller. This SBC was selected, because it is affordable
(about US $30) and has low energy consumption. For an easy
development, the system also includes an RViz simulation,
which allows to run tests without the need to have the robot
Besides, three microcontrollers (MCUs) are connected to
control the actuators of the physical robot through three
point-to-point UART communication ports using the rosse-
rial package. The Perception Neuron Suit is connected to
a Windows PC using a USB port or WiFi, this way, the
Perception Neuron Broadcast can be connected to the Axis
Neuron Pro to acquire the packages and send them to
the ROS master. Furthermore an Oculus Rift headset is
connected to a Windows PC over HDMI and USB in order to
extract user’s head movements and sends them to the ROS
master in the same way that is done with the Perception.
Then, all the modules interact through ROS topics with the
aim to update the servomotors’ positions using Pulse Width
Modulation (PWM) generated by the MCUs.
A. Perception Neuron
The Perception Neuron is a full-body MoCap System de-
veloped by Noitom Ltd. It is composed of “neurons”, which
consist in IMUs located in specific position and orientation
of the suit that grants a consistent coordinate system. These
Fig. 3. The BVH format diagram for the Perception Neuron data.
neurons are connected to a HUB that collects, processes
and packages information about the motion captured from
the operator, transferring it at a frequency of about 60
Hz in the full body configuration. Noitom Ltd. provides a
software called Axis Neuron Pro which allows the extraction
of sensors’ data and the development of third-party software
using a C/C++ API.
The Axis Neuron Pro acts as a TCP server, while the
Perception Neuron Broadcast node imports the C/C++ API
and was developed to establish a connection to this server.
The API provides a callback function that is called every
time the server publishes a new data frame, with information
about the kinematics of the human body represented with
the Biovision Hierarchical format (BVH). This is a format
for representing MoCap data that is commonly used in
the industry of animation and production of movies. It is
composed of “bones”, where the human body is described
using a tree structure with the proper Euler angles of each
bone [19]. In this case, the “Hips” represent the ROOT of
the tree, as illustrated in Fig. 3. The Perception Neuron
Broadcast uses the rosserial windows node to connect to
the ROS core running in the Pine A64 and, every time the
callback function is called, it takes the data frame and sends
it as ROS topics for their use in the robot mapping node.
Fig. 4. Representation of coordinate frames for the Oculus Rift headset
and for the robot’s head; xaxis in red, yin green, and zin blue.
B. Oculus Rift
The Oculus Rift is the VR headset used in this system.
It allows the operator to view what the robot is seeing
through its eye-cameras, bringing an immersing experience
to the users [20]. This is achieved using two HD cameras
placed into the eyes of the robot, capturing video that
is later processed and projected into the Oculus display.
Furthermore, the headset is used to get the information
needed for imitating the operator’s head movements with
the robot’s head, complementing the generalized coordinates
provided by the MoCap system, as shown in Fig. 4. This is
obtained using the Oculus SDK using a Windows PC. Then,
the information about the Euler angles of the operator’s head
is sent to the Leonardo controller (Fig. 2) in a similar way
as the MoCap data.
C. Hardware Configuration
Leonardo GreenMoov is a 3D-printed humanoid robot
based on the open source InMoov project [21], which has 51
degrees of freedom (DOF), 27 degrees of actuation (DOA)
(five for each hand, one per finger, five for each arm, two
for the torso, two for the hips, two for the neck and one for
the jaw). In this manner, the only DOAs that are used for
this project involve the actuators for the arms and the head,
to make a total of 23 servo motors (5 in each arm, 3 in the
head and 2 in the torso). This actuators are controlled using
three MK66FX1M0VMD18 MCUs, from NXP. Besides, it
has two cameras in the eyes, a speaker in the hips and a set
of binaural microphones placed in the robot’s ears.
D. Motion Mapping Controller
The Motion Mapping is implemented as a ROS node that
subscribes to the topics which have the Euler angles that are
sent from the MoCap System and the VR headset. This node
processes each message as described in Section III. Then, it
sends commands to the Leonardo Controller to execute the
movements that the operator is performing. This controller
acts as a central module of communication for the physical
robot and the RViz simulation (Fig. 6), it receives the motion
commands and validates them against the constraints of the
physical robot to ensure that the movement will not break
the robot for trying to move to an unreachable pose.
To describe the movements of the robot’s arms it is
essential to properly allocate the rotation axes into the robot
model to have a consistent representation of each DOF. Since
the robot needs to perform tasks that require a proper tracking
of the orientation of the operator’s arms links rather than the
precise positions of the elbow and wrist, it is not possible
to rely on methods that are only sensitive to changes on
the end-effector’s position, such as the algorithms based on
least squares, e.g. Damped Least Squares (DLS) [22,23].
Moreover, it is imperative to solve the inverse kinematics
for the robot’s arms configuration with the aim to have a
more complying performance. Since there are many options
to solve this problem, the most effective one is to manually
Fig. 5. Leonardo’s arms geometry model with its coordinate frames.
obtain the equations that describe the rotation of each joint
of the robot’s arms. To describe the geometry of the motion
performed by the link between the shoulder and the elbow
of the robot, due the intrinsic and extrinsic rotations of its
joints (θ1θ3), as shown in the Fig. 5, it was necessary to
generate the homogeneous transformation that describes the
orientation of the shoulder through its rotation matrix R03,
as it is shown in the Equation (1).
In order to obtain the equations that map the generalized
coordinates qof the robot’s arms configuration (shoulder
and elbow, as shown on Fig. 5) the proper sequence of Euler
angles obtained from the MoCap suit were used. For this case
of study it was used the traditional notation from the defined
rotation matrix R03 described in the equation (1), which
transforms the orientation of the elbow from the coordinate
frames 0(shoulder) to 3(elbow), and that is composed by
three column vectors named: normal, slide and approach,
where R03 = [n,s,a], with R03 R3x3,nR3,sR3
and aR3. Namely, each one of these vectors has an x,y
and zcomponent. These vectors compose a 3×3matrix that
describes each one of the rotations that the robot executes,
this is shown below:
R03 =
The presence of the spherical joint that humans have in the
shoulder makes it very difficult to map movements directly to
the actuators in a humanoid robot. The task of replicate this
type of joints brings great difficulties of design and a more
expensive actuator selection. Nevertheless in this case it was
the robot manage to execute the task needed for the studies
that were made with out this type of joints. At first, it was
Fig. 6. Axis Neuron visualization and the RViz Simulation.
necessary to perform the analysis of forward kinematics (FK)
from the robot’s arms configuration (shoulder to elbow) to
obtain the rotation matrix previously mentioned. Therefore,
the orientation of each frame was delimited with the Euler
angles’ sequence using the Tait-Bryan convention ZXY; it
is also relevant to mention that there was no direct mapping
configuration to match the proper Euler angles of the MoCap
suit. Also, the FK (shoulder to elbow) from the MoCap suit
is necessary in order to execute the motion mapping properly
by obtaining the orientation of the elbow, since the human
body does not have a displacement lon the shoulder like the
robot does. Therefore, this guarantees to having an effective
way to map the controller actions, since this is also an open
loop system that does not have a feedback from the links
position. This is the fundamental reason for which the system
does not qualify as a control for human operations, instead
it is a robot mapping solution that centers in imitating the
arms’ orientation within the robot’s workspace.
The generalized coordinates for the robot’s arm’s config-
uration are presented in the Equation (2). After knowing the
orientation of the forearm (at the elbow joint), it is possible to
directly map the intrinsic rotations of the elbow and wrist of
the MoCap system using the following Euler angle sequence
ZYX = [α, β, γ ], where θ4=γand θ5=α. This also
relieves the system from singularities, hence there does not
exist a scenario where this type of events can occur. Fig. 5
illustrates which part of the arm is controlled by each one
of the angles derived from the rotation matrices. Also this
diagram was used as reference to elaborate the FK from the
robot’s arms. As can be seen in Fig. 3, the same axis frame
was used to generate the FK of the MoCap and have a better
Fig. 7. Simulation’s results showing two different trajectories of Leonardo’s left elbow.
coherence with the further calculations for the robot’s arm
atan2 (sx,sy)
atan2 (nz,az)
The fact of keeping the axes in the same orientation
makes a simpler implementation than using more general ap-
proaches, like the Denavit-Hartenberg algorithm, that grants
a particular solution that can be generated by aligning the
reference axes in any other orientation, but this may produce
further complications at the moment of assigning a positive
or a negative rotation to the robot’s actuators.
On the other hand, the head of the robot can be oriented
utilizing the Euler angles provided by the Oculus Rift as
can be appreciated in Fig. 4. In addition to that, the image
resolution and the frame rate can be modified to ensure a
fluid and vivid experience that does not fatigue the user
during operation. Altogether, the system is able to map
the orientation of the robot’s arms, reacting to actions of
opening and closing the hands by setting a threshold in the
fingers’ orientation. The mouth can also be configured to
work synchronously with voice or text-to-speech nodes to
provide a more realistic experience for the robot collaborator.
The system does not have any type of response for the joints
placed on the hips of the robot.
In order to validate how the motion mapping problem is
addressed for this specific case, some tests were made under
different scenarios using MATLAB and ROS. These tests
produced acceptable results obtained by the system in real
situations, as shown in Fig. 1. On these tests, different left
arm trajectories, composed of a time window of 100 Euler
angles for each joint, were generated and then processed.
In all tests, the angular velocities from the operator’s joints
were assumed as constants, as well as the robot workspace’s
constraints. Moreover, a visual resemblance of the animation
generated by the MoCap suit, alongside with the virtual robot
controlled by the Motion Mapping node, is shown in Fig. 6.
This representation is shown using the ROS Visualization
tool (RViz). The Fig. 7(a) shows a scenario where the robot’s
left elbow tracks the operator’s motion with almost a perfect
match; this test was performed using a trajectory composed
of Euler angles on the ZYX configuration; from the rest
position to the elbow’s orientation denoted by 3π
4,0,0. On
the other hand, the Fig. 7(b) describes a movement where
the shoulder displacement of the robot makes it impossible to
reach the same position as the MoCap system throughout the
trajectory; however, it always follows the same orientation
as the operator’s elbow. This test was performed using
ZYX =π
6as final orientation of one of the generated
trajectories, also starting from the rest position. Hence, the
resulting generalized coordinates for this particular test are
represented in a subset of q, described as ˆ
q= [θ1, θ2, θ3]T
[1.1832,0.3614,0.8571]T. Finally, as can be appreciated in
Fig. 8, the position error reaches moderate values, about
[x, y, z]T[0.038,0.022,0.071]Tmeters, as shown in the
Fig 7.(b), scenario where the endeffector tracks the trajectory
in terms of position is not achievable for the robot.
Fig. 8. Elbow position error for the test presented in Fig. 7(b).
Fig. 9. Robot Head controlled using the Oculus Rift DK2.
Besides, satisfactory results were obtained using the Ocu-
lus Rift DK2 to map motions from the operator’s head, as
shown in Fig. 9. The only rotational motion constraint is
the absence of the intrinsic rotation about the xaxis in the
robot’s neck (roll angle) due the amount of DOAs in the
robots head’s configuration, as mentioned in Subsection II.C
and as is illustrated in Fig. 4.
Since the robot’s head provides an immersive VR experi-
ence to the operator, providing different and innovative, the
robot’s surroundings are presented through stereo images and
sound. Therefore, it is interesting for future works to measure
both user and audience experiences after interacting with the
system. In this case, the concept of using humanoid robots to
involve people on the tech fields has been shown to different
types of audience and achieving great acceptance. This
statement inspires to evaluate the human robot interaction on
future tests. Moreover, the arms’ orientations are replicated at
a successful level and, in some cases, could achieve the exact
orientation of the operator’s arm, depending on the proper
implementation of a closed loop control system and on the
actuators’ constraints. The position error may vary, because
of the displacement lin the robot shoulder’s configuration.
As matter of fact, in some tests, the suit loses precision
relatively faster than the VR headset and is necessary to re-
calibrate it to continue working properly. Finally, the system
has been tested during long iterations, of a maximum of 3
hours, without showing fatigue or misalignment.
[1] N. S. Pollard, J. K. Hodgins, M. J. Riley, and C. G. Atkeson, “Adapting
human motion for the control of a humanoid robot,” in Proceedings
2002 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (Cat.
No. 02CH37292), vol. 2. IEEE, 2002, pp. 1390–1397.
[2] G. H. Ballantyne, “Robotic surgery, telerobotic surgery, telepresence,
and telementoring,” Surgical Endoscopy and Other Interventional
Techniques, vol. 16, no. 10, pp. 1389–1402, 2002.
[3] D. Gong, J. Yu, and G. Zuo, “Motion mapping for the heterogeneous
master-slave teleoperation robot using unit dual quaternions,” in 2017
IEEE 7th Annual International Conference on CYBER Technology in
Automation, Control, and Intelligent Systems (CYBER). IEEE, 2017,
pp. 1194–1199.
[4] K. Theofilis, J. Orlosky, Y. Nagai, and K. Kiyokawa, “Panoramic view
reconstruction for stereoscopic teleoperation of a humanoid robot,” in
2016 IEEE-RAS 16th International Conference on Humanoid Robots
(Humanoids). IEEE, 2016, pp. 242–248.
[5] U. A. Chattha and M. A. Shah, “Survey on causes of motion
sickness in virtual reality,” in 2018 24th International Conference on
Automation and Computing (ICAC). IEEE, 2018, pp. 1–5.
[6] K. Rohr, “Towards model-based recognition of human movements in
image sequences,” CVGIP: Image understanding, vol. 59, no. 1, pp.
94–115, 1994.
[7] D. Fitzgerald, J. Foody, D. Kelly, T. Ward, C. Markham, J. McDonald,
and B. Caulfield, “Development of a wearable motion capture suit
and virtual reality biofeedback system for the instruction and analysis
of sports rehabilitation exercises,” in 2007 29th Annual International
Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society.
IEEE, 2007, pp. 4870–4874.
[8] J. R. Whitson, “The new spirit of capitalism in the game industry,
Television & New Media, p. 1527476419851086, 2019.
[9] D. N. Aratuo and X. L. Etienne, “Industry level analysis of tourism-
economic growth in the united states,Tourism Management, vol. 70,
pp. 333–340, 2019.
[10] P. Morasso, M. Casadio, P. Giannoni, L. Masia, V. Sanguineti,
V. Squeri, and E. Vergaro, “Desirable features of a “humanoid” robot-
therapist,” in 2009 Annual International Conference of the IEEE
Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE, 2009, pp. 2418–
[11] A. Guneysu, B. Arnrich, and C. Ersoy, “Children’s rehabilitation with
humanoid robots and wearable inertial measurement units,” in Pro-
ceedings of the 9th International Conference on Pervasive Computing
Technologies for Healthcare. ICST (Institute for Computer Sciences,
Social-Informatics and . .., 2015, pp. 249–252.
[12] N. Miller, O. C. Jenkins, M. Kallmann, and M. J. Mataric, “Motion
capture from inertial sensing for untethered humanoid teleoperation,”
in 4th IEEE/RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots,
2004., vol. 2. IEEE, 2004, pp. 547–565.
[13] H. Yi, C. Knabe, T. Pesek, and D. W. Hong, “Experiential learning in
the development of a darwin-hp humanoid educational robot,Journal
of Intelligent & Robotic Systems, vol. 81, no. 1, pp. 41–49, 2016.
[14] P. Rezeck, F. Cadar, J. Soares, B. Frade, L. Pinto, H. Azpurua, D. G.
Macharet, L. Chaimowicz, G. Freitas, and M. F. M. Campos, “An
immersion enhancing robotic head-like device for teleoperation,” in
2018 Latin American Robotic Symposium, 2018 Brazilian Symposium
on Robotics (SBR) and 2018 Workshop on Robotics in Education
(WRE). IEEE, 2018, pp. 164–169.
[15] G. Langevin, “Inmoov open-source 3d printed life-size robot,
pp. URL:, License: http://creativecommons.
org/licenses/by–nc/3.0/legalcode, 2014.
[16] M. Sakashita, T. Minagawa, A. Koike, I. Suzuki, K. Kawahara, and
Y. Ochiai, “You as a puppet: Evaluation of telepresence user interface
for puppetry,” in Proceedings of the 30th Annual ACM Symposium on
User Interface Software and Technology. ACM, 2017, pp. 217–228.
[17] F. Bazzano and F. Lamberti, “Human-robot interfaces for interactive
receptionist systems and wayfinding applications,” Robotics, vol. 7,
no. 3, p. 56, 2018.
[18] R. Karunasenal, P. Sandarenu, M. Pinto, A. Athukorala, R. Rodrigo,
and P. Jayasekara, “Devi: Open-source human-robot interface for
interactive receptionist systems,” 2019.
[19] M. Meredith, S. Maddock et al., “Motion capture file formats ex-
plained,” Department of Computer Science, University of Sheffield,
vol. 211, pp. 241–244, 2001.
[20] S. M. LaValle, A. Yershova, M. Katsev, and M. Antonov, “Head
tracking for the oculus rift,” in 2014 IEEE International Conference
on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2014, pp. 187–194.
[21] W. Xu, X. Li, W. Xu, L. Gong, Y. Huang, Z. Zhao, L. Zhao, B. Chen,
H. Yang, L. Cao et al., “Human-robot interaction oriented human-
in-the-loop real-time motion imitation on a humanoid tri-co robot,”
in 2018 3rd International Conference on Advanced Robotics and
Mechatronics (ICARM). IEEE, 2018, pp. 781–786.
[22] Y. Nakamura and H. Hanafusa, “Inverse kinematic solutions with sin-
gularity robustness for robot manipulator control,” Journal of dynamic
systems, measurement, and control, vol. 108, no. 3, pp. 163–171, 1986.
[23] A. A. Maciejewski and J. M. Reagin, “A parallel algorithm and
architecture for the control of kinematically redundant manipulators,”
IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, vol. 10, no. 4, pp.
405–414, 1994.
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Full-text available
Service robots are playing an increasingly relevant role in society. Humanoid robots, especially those equipped with social skills, could be used to address a number of people’s daily needs. Knowing how these robots are perceived and potentially accepted by ordinary users when used in common tasks and what the benefits brought are in terms, e.g., of tasks’ effectiveness, is becoming of primary importance. This paper specifically focuses on receptionist scenarios, which can be regarded as a good benchmark for social robotics applications given their implications on human-robot interaction. Precisely, the goal of this paper is to investigate how robots used as direction-giving systems can be perceived by human users and can impact on their wayfinding performance. A comparative analysis is performed, considering both solutions from the literature and new implementations which use different types of interfaces to ask for and give directions (voice, in-the-air arm pointing gestures, route tracing) and various embodiments (physical robot, virtual agent, interactive audio-map). Experimental results showed a marked preference for a physical robot-based system showing directions on a map over solutions using gestures, as well as a positive effect of embodiment and social behaviors. Moreover, in the comparison, physical robots were generally preferred to virtual agents.
This article draws from ethnographic work in the game industry to challenge claims that digital platforms “democratize” cultural production by supporting small teams. I show how game developers exemplify the New Spirit of Capitalism in their search for creative autonomy outside of the risk-averse blockbuster console industry. Their risk of cultural production is ostensibly reduced by tools that leverage big data. By following one studio making free-to-play mobile games, I test the celebratory claims of democratization against the reality of implementing these now-essential analytics tools. The studio’s experiences demonstrate how mobile production for digital platforms intensifies game labor rather than facilitating its democratization in any straightforward way. It restricts creative autonomy, exacerbates the burden of risk on developers, and reinforces existing market and gender inequities. Rather than creatively liberating developers and expanding access to game development, data-driven design for digital platforms introduces new gatekeepers and literacies of exclusion.
We investigate the relationship between economic growth and six tourism-related sub-industries (accommodation, air transportation, shopping, food and beverage, other transportation, and recreation and entertainment) in the United States in 1998–2017. Except for the lodging and the food and beverage sectors, no long-run relationship exists between other tourism sub-industries and economic growth. We uncover a unidirectional Granger causality from economic growth to each of the sub-industries. Causality is also found between the tourism industries but predominantly from industries providing local offerings (food, entertainment, shopping) to those delivering cross-destination goods and services. Our results suggest that tourism investment could be successful in the long-run even during periods of economic stagnation. In the short-run, however, tourism sectors could benefit from economic growth and tourism-related investment should take a cue from the general economy. Additionally, tourism-related investment and marketing efforts in the U.S. may wish to focus on the food, shopping, and leisure sectors.
Conference Paper
We propose an immersive telepresence system for puppetry that transmits a human performer's body and facial movements into a puppet with audiovisual feedback to the performer. The cameras carried in place of puppet's eyes stream live video to the HMD worn by the performer, so that performers can see the images from the puppet's eyes with their own eyes and have a visual understanding of the puppet's ambience. In conventional methods to manipulate a puppet (a hand-puppet, a string-puppet, and a rod-puppet), there is a need to practice manipulating puppets, and there is difficulty carrying out interactions with the audience. Moreover, puppeteers must be positioned exactly where the puppet is. The proposed system addresses these issues by enabling a human performer to manipulate the puppet remotely using his or her body and facial movements. We conducted several user studies with both beginners and professional puppeteers. The results show that, unlike the conventional method, the proposed system facilitates the manipulation of puppets especially for beginners. Moreover, this system allows performers to enjoy puppetry and fascinate audiences.