Skip to content
aiqbench takeMachine Learning

aiqbench analysis

This research applies causal inference frameworks to human-robot interaction, specifically demonstrating how accounting for confounding variables corrects biased conclusions about social navigation signals in corridors. By modeling the mechanisms linking robot actions and pedestrian outcomes, the study proves that naive observational data can misleadingly suggest a signal is detrimental when it is actually beneficial. This work advances the theoretical rigor of autonomous agents operating in shared human spaces by ensuring their decision-making logic remains robust against environmental biases.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Estimating the Causal Impact of Social Navigation Signals in Corridor Scenarios

arXiv3 min read

arXiv:2610.16411v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Deploying robots in human-shared environments requires deciding not only how to navigate, but also when dedicated social signals are worth emitting. Classic observation-based inference can be misleading in such settings: confounding factors may bias the estimated relationship between a signal and the task outcome, leading to incorrect decisions. Causal inference provides a framework for disentangling these relationships by modelling the mechanisms linking observations, actions, and outcomes, and by estimating interventional effects after accounting for confounding paths. We study a human-robot interaction scenario in a corridor and use a causal model to estimate whether a social navigation signal causally improves transit success. We represent the interaction as a causal DAG involving robot action, pedestrian occupancy, available space, task outcome, and a controlled confounder (static obstacles). We compare the interventional estimate with the observational estimate obtained by conditioning only on the robot action, which does not explicitly model interventions. Our results show that accounting for confounding variables can reverse the conclusions drawn from naive observational analysis: the observational estimate wrongly suggests that the social signal is detrimental, whereas the causal estimate shows that it is beneficial. This discrepancy highlights how failing to account for confounding can lead to incorrect conclusions and demonstrates the importance of causal models for context-aware signalling decisions in social robot navigation.

Abstract:Deploying robots in human-shared environments requires deciding not only how to navigate, but also when dedicated social signals are worth emitting. Classic observation-based inference can be misleading in such settings: confounding factors may bias the estimated relationship between a signal and the task outcome, leading to incorrect decisions. Causal inference provides a framework for disentangling these relationships by modelling the mechanisms linking observations, actions, and outcomes, and by estimating interventional effects after accounting for confounding paths. We study a human-robot interaction scenario in a corridor and use a causal model to estimate whether a social navigation signal causally improves transit success. We represent the interaction as a causal DAG involving robot action, pedestrian occupancy, available space, task outcome, and a controlled confounder (static obstacles). We compare the interventional estimate with the observational estimate obtained by conditioning only on the robot action, which does not explicitly model interventions. Our results show that accounting for confounding variables can reverse the conclusions drawn from naive observational analysis: the observational estimate wrongly suggests that the social signal is detrimental, whereas the causal estimate shows that it is beneficial. This discrepancy highlights how failing to account for confounding can lead to incorrect conclusions and demonstrates the importance of causal models for context-aware signalling decisions in social robot navigation.

Robotics (cs.RO); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)

arXiv:2610.16411 [cs.RO]

(or arXiv:2610.16411v1 [cs.RO] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.16411 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 309 words

Related coverage