Three Key Challenges in ARM-COMS for Entrainment Effect Acceleration in Remote Communication

  • Teruaki Ito
  • Tomio Watanabe
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 8521)


Remote communication systems, which are getting popular these days, allow us to enjoy the benefit of audio/video communication over the network. However, communication based on these systems is still not identical to face-to-face meetings. For example, open issues include lack of tele-presence, lack of entrainment in communication, etc. In order to tackle these issues, this study proposes an idea of remote individuals’ connection through augmented tele-presence systems called ARM-COMS: ARm-supported eMbodied COmmunication Monitor System. ARM-COMS is composed of a tablet PC as an ICT (Information and Communication Technology) device and a desktop robotic arm which manipulates the tablet. Two types of modes, or intelligent tablet mode (IT-mode) and intelligent avatar mode (IA-mode), play a key role in ARM-COMS to implement the three functions; namely, autonomous positioning (AP), autonomous entrainment movement (AEM), and autonomous entrainment positioning (AEP). This paper proposes the basic concept of ARM-COMS to accelerate the entrainment effect in remote communication.


Embodied communication augmented tele-presence robotic arm manipulation human interface remote communication 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Abowdm, D.G., Mynatt, D.E.: Charting past, present, and future research in ubiquitous computing. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI) 7(1), 29–58 (2000)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Greenberg, S.: Peepholes: low cost awareness of one’s community. In: Conference Companion on Human Factors in Computing Systems: Common Ground, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, pp. 206–207 (1996)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ito, T., Watanabe, T.: ARM-COMS: Arm-supported embodied communication monitor system. In: Yamamoto, S. (ed.) HIMI/HCII 2013, Part III. LNCS, vol. 8018, pp. 307–316. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kashiwabara, T., Osawa, H., Shinozawa, K., Imai, M.: TEROOS: a wearable avatar to enhance joint activities. In: Annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pp. 2001–2004 (May 2012)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kim, K., Bolton, J., Girouard, A., Cooperstock, J., Vertegaal, R.: TeleHuman: Effects of 3D Perspective on Gaze and Pose Estimation with a Life-size Cylindrical Telepresence Pod. In: Proc. of CHI 2012, pp. 2531–2540 (2012)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
  7. 7.
    Okada, K., Maeda, F., Ichikawa, Y., Matsushita, Y.: Multiparty videoconferencing at virtual social distance: MAJIC design. In: SCW 1994 Proceedings of the 1994 ACM Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW 1994), pp. 385–393 (1994)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Osawa, T., Matsuda, Y., Ohmura, R., Imai, M.: Embodiment of an agent by anthropomorphization of a common object. Web Intelligence and Agent Systems: An International Journal 10, 345–358 (2012)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Ohtsuka, S., Oka, S., Kihara, K., Tsuruda, T., Seki, M.: Human-body swing affects visibility of scrolled characters with direction dependency. In: 2011 Symposium Digest of Technical Papers, Society for Information Display (SID), pp. 309–312 (2011)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Otsuka, T., Araki, S., Ishizuka, K., Fujimoto, M., Heinrich, M., Yamato, J.: A Realtime Multimodal System for Analyzing Group Meetings by Combining Face Pose Tracking and Speaker Diarization. In: Proc. of the 10th International Conference on Multimodal Interfaces (ICMI 2008), Chania, Crete, Greece, pp. 257–264 (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sirkin, D., Ju, W.: Consistency in physical and on-screen action improves perceptions of telepresence robots. In: HRI 2012, Proceedings of the Seventh Annual ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, pp. 57–64 (2012)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Tariq, A.M., Ito, T.: Master-slave robotic arm manipulation for communication robot. Japan Society of Mechanical Engineer, Proceedings of 2011 Annual Meeting 11(1), S12013 (2011)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tomotoshi, M., Ito, T.: A study on awareness support method to improve engagement in remote communication. In: First International Symposium on Socially and Technically Symbiotic System (STSS 2012), Okayama, vol. 39, pp. 1–6 (August 2012)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Watanabe, T.: Human-entrained Embodied Interaction and Communication Technology. In: Emotional Engineering, pp. 161–177. Springer (2011)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Watanabe, T., Okubo, M., Nakashige, M., Danbara, R.: InterActor: Speech-Driven Embodied Interactive Actor. International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 17(1), 43–60 (2004)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wongphati, M., Matsuda, Y., Osawa, H., Imai, M.: Where do you want to use a robotic arm? And what do you want from the robot? In: International Symposium on Robot and Human Interactive Communication, pp. 322–327 (September 2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Yakuyama, H., Tsunami, Y., Tadakuma, R.: Evaluation of an enhanced-motion display. In: SICE Tohoku, ch. 267-17, pp. 1–5 (2011) (in Japanese) Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Teruaki Ito
    • 1
  • Tomio Watanabe
    • 2
  1. 1.The University of TokushimaTokushimaJapan
  2. 2.Okayama Prefectural UniversitySoujaJapan

Personalised recommendations