B. Mutlu et al. (Eds.): ICSR 2011, LNAI 7072, pp. 52–61, 2011. © Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011 Proxemic Feature Recognition for Interactive Robots: Automating Metrics from the Social Sciences Ross Mead, Amin Atrash, and Maja J. Matarić Interaction Lab, Computer Science Department, University of Southern California {rossmead,atrash,mataric}@usc.edu Abstract. In this work, we discuss a set of metrics for analyzing human spatial behavior (proxemics) motivated by work in the social sciences. Specifically, we investigate individual, attentional, interpersonal, and physiological factors that contribute to social spacing. We demonstrate the feasibility of autonomous real- time annotation of these spatial features during multi-person social encounters. We utilize sensor suites that are non-invasive to participants, are readily dep- loyable in a variety of environments (ranging from an instrumented workspace to a mobile robot platform), and do not interfere with the social interaction it- self. Finally, we provide a discussion of the impact of these metrics and their utility in autonomous socially interactive systems. Keywords: Proxemics, spatial interaction, spatial dynamics, social spacing, social robot, human-robot interaction, PrimeSensor, Microsoft Kinect. 1 Introduction and Background Proxemics is the study of the dynamic process by which people position themselves in face-to-face social encounters [1]. This process is governed by sociocultural norms that, in effect, determine the overall sensory experience of each interacting participant [2]. People use proxemic signals, such as distance, stance, hip and shoulder orienta- tion, head pose, and eye gaze, to communicate an interest in initiating, accepting, maintaining, terminating, or avoiding social interaction [3-5]. People can also mani- pulate space in an interaction, perhaps to direct attention to an external stimulus (usually accompanied by a hand gesture) or to guide a social partner to another loca- tion [6]. These cues are often subtle and noisy, and, subsequently, are subject to coarse analysis. There exists a considerable body of work in the social sciences that seeks to ana- lyze and explain certain proxemic phenomena. The anthropologist Edward T. Hall [1] coined the term “proxemics”, and proposed that physiological influences shaped by culture define zones of proxemic distances [2, 7]. Mehrabian [5], Argyle and Dean [8], and Burgoon et al. [9] analyzed spatial behaviors as a function of the interper- sonal relationship between social partners. Schöne [10] was inspired by the spatial behaviors of biological organisms in response to stimuli, and investigated human spatial dynamics from physiological and ethological perspectives; similarly, Hayduk