Cargando…

How long did it last? You would better ask a human

In the future, human-like robots will live among people to provide company and help carrying out tasks in cooperation with humans. These interactions require that robots understand not only human actions, but also the way in which we perceive the world. Human perception heavily relies on the time di...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Lacquaniti, Francesco, Carrozzo, Mauro, d’Avella, Andrea, La Scaleia, Barbara, Moscatelli, Alessandro, Zago, Myrka
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2014
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3902214/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24478694
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnbot.2014.00002
_version_ 1782300961336721408
author Lacquaniti, Francesco
Carrozzo, Mauro
d’Avella, Andrea
La Scaleia, Barbara
Moscatelli, Alessandro
Zago, Myrka
author_facet Lacquaniti, Francesco
Carrozzo, Mauro
d’Avella, Andrea
La Scaleia, Barbara
Moscatelli, Alessandro
Zago, Myrka
author_sort Lacquaniti, Francesco
collection PubMed
description In the future, human-like robots will live among people to provide company and help carrying out tasks in cooperation with humans. These interactions require that robots understand not only human actions, but also the way in which we perceive the world. Human perception heavily relies on the time dimension, especially when it comes to processing visual motion. Critically, human time perception for dynamic events is often inaccurate. Robots interacting with humans may want to see the world and tell time the way humans do: if so, they must incorporate human-like fallacy. Observers asked to judge the duration of brief scenes are prone to errors: perceived duration often does not match the physical duration of the event. Several kinds of temporal distortions have been described in the specialized literature. Here we review the topic with a special emphasis on our work dealing with time perception of animate actors versus inanimate actors. This work shows the existence of specialized time bases for different categories of targets. The time base used by the human brain to process visual motion appears to be calibrated against the specific predictions regarding the motion of human figures in case of animate motion, while it can be calibrated against the predictions of motion of passive objects in case of inanimate motion. Human perception of time appears to be strictly linked with the mechanisms used to control movements. Thus, neural time can be entrained by external cues in a similar manner for both perceptual judgments of elapsed time and in motor control tasks. One possible strategy could be to implement in humanoids a unique architecture for dealing with time, which would apply the same specialized mechanisms to both perception and action, similarly to humans. This shared implementation might render the humanoids more acceptable to humans, thus facilitating reciprocal interactions.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-3902214
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2014
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-39022142014-01-29 How long did it last? You would better ask a human Lacquaniti, Francesco Carrozzo, Mauro d’Avella, Andrea La Scaleia, Barbara Moscatelli, Alessandro Zago, Myrka Front Neurorobot Neuroscience In the future, human-like robots will live among people to provide company and help carrying out tasks in cooperation with humans. These interactions require that robots understand not only human actions, but also the way in which we perceive the world. Human perception heavily relies on the time dimension, especially when it comes to processing visual motion. Critically, human time perception for dynamic events is often inaccurate. Robots interacting with humans may want to see the world and tell time the way humans do: if so, they must incorporate human-like fallacy. Observers asked to judge the duration of brief scenes are prone to errors: perceived duration often does not match the physical duration of the event. Several kinds of temporal distortions have been described in the specialized literature. Here we review the topic with a special emphasis on our work dealing with time perception of animate actors versus inanimate actors. This work shows the existence of specialized time bases for different categories of targets. The time base used by the human brain to process visual motion appears to be calibrated against the specific predictions regarding the motion of human figures in case of animate motion, while it can be calibrated against the predictions of motion of passive objects in case of inanimate motion. Human perception of time appears to be strictly linked with the mechanisms used to control movements. Thus, neural time can be entrained by external cues in a similar manner for both perceptual judgments of elapsed time and in motor control tasks. One possible strategy could be to implement in humanoids a unique architecture for dealing with time, which would apply the same specialized mechanisms to both perception and action, similarly to humans. This shared implementation might render the humanoids more acceptable to humans, thus facilitating reciprocal interactions. Frontiers Media S.A. 2014-01-27 /pmc/articles/PMC3902214/ /pubmed/24478694 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnbot.2014.00002 Text en Copyright © 2014 Lacquaniti, Carrozzo, d’Avella, La Scaleia, Moscatelli and Zago. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Neuroscience
Lacquaniti, Francesco
Carrozzo, Mauro
d’Avella, Andrea
La Scaleia, Barbara
Moscatelli, Alessandro
Zago, Myrka
How long did it last? You would better ask a human
title How long did it last? You would better ask a human
title_full How long did it last? You would better ask a human
title_fullStr How long did it last? You would better ask a human
title_full_unstemmed How long did it last? You would better ask a human
title_short How long did it last? You would better ask a human
title_sort how long did it last? you would better ask a human
topic Neuroscience
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3902214/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24478694
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fnbot.2014.00002
work_keys_str_mv AT lacquanitifrancesco howlongdiditlastyouwouldbetteraskahuman
AT carrozzomauro howlongdiditlastyouwouldbetteraskahuman
AT davellaandrea howlongdiditlastyouwouldbetteraskahuman
AT lascaleiabarbara howlongdiditlastyouwouldbetteraskahuman
AT moscatellialessandro howlongdiditlastyouwouldbetteraskahuman
AT zagomyrka howlongdiditlastyouwouldbetteraskahuman