Towards Fluent Interaction with Cyber-Physical Architecture

Abstract

What happens when your walls begin to move? This paper explores the design of human-robot interaction for architectural-scale, shape-changing environments. We present findings from two studies: (1) a series of speculative design workshops (N=20) that uncovered aspirational visions for these spaces, and (2) a task-based Wizard-of-Oz elicitation study (N=12) that grounded these visions in the challenges of practical interaction. Our workshop findings reveal a complex landscape of user desires, exposing critical tensions between proactive automation and the preservation of user autonomy, and between personalization and public ownership. Our elicitation study reveals a set of core interaction challenges related to multimodal collaboration; and, most critically: suggests the need for a modality-agnostic model of evolving user intent. We conclude with a set of grounded proposals for creating robotic environments that are collaborative and trusted partners in everyday life.

Figures (18)

• Figure 1: Through two complementary studies, we sought to understand what people might desire from shape-changing architecture, and how they interact with such systems in practice. Both studies point to a tension relating to implicit context: to allow for the types naturalistic interactions that were envisioned by participants in Study 1 and enacted by participants in Study 2, robotic environments may need to provocatively infer instructions that users do not explicitly command.
• Figure 2: Participants in our design workshops were able to observe our robotic wall (a), and could request shape-changing demonstrations from our facilitator. They were also given a toy model to explore (d), which could be manually reconfigured. Throughout the workshop, participants sketched scenarios (c) and discussed hopes and concerns (d) related to cyber-physical architecture.
• Figure 3: Analyzing the data from our design workshops, we identified eleven values which underpinned the scenarios our participants created. Some values are best categorized as "functional" (associated with tangible and pragmatic concerns), while others are best categorized as "relational" (describing psychological qualities of human-machine interaction). During our workshop discussions, tensions emerged between many of these values.
• Figure 4: Participants developed storyboard scenarios illustrating the value of space optimization. The examples include a) managing peak and off-peak crowding, b) partitioning spaces for different social interactions, c) configuring homes for work and leisure, d) creating on-demand surfaces, e) customizing public seating, f) enabling child-friendly storage, and g) designing multi-use apartment furniture.
• Figure 5: Storyboard scenarios illustrate architectural-scale applications for energy efficiency: a) rooftop air-intake and sun-shielding structures, and b) climate-adaptive facades that adjust to block solar heat and reduce cooling demand.