Proposing a Game Theory Approach to Explore Group Dynamics with Social Robot

Robots designed to mediate human groups often fall into the solutionist trap: they are framed as sociable agents that fix problems such as conflict, disengagement, or lack of coordination. We suggest a different way of thinking. Rather than discrete agents, robots can be understood as situated elements of shared environments; catalysts and carriers of group experience whose meaning emerges through how people position, interpret, and interact with them. From this perspective, robots are not there to repair some ostensible dysfunctionality, but to enable group-level sense-making around care, norms, and identity. Our prior work on robotic street furniture suggests that this does not happen by imitating human sociality but by taking the shape of deliberately constrained, group-facing entities that happen and act for us without being socially entangled as one of us. We thus understand robots in public spaces not in terms of autonomy or intelligence, but as a relational capacity. This implies designing robots not in our image or for our utility, but grounded in our needs in being and becoming together.

Accompanying a group of humans is an essential aspect of developing human-like social cognition in robots. However, human groups typically do not follow fixed formations, which poses significant challenges for robots in maintaining natural companionship behaviors. In this paper, we propose an adaptive group-accompaniment method for social robots based on Vision-Language Models (VLMs), leveraging their semantic reasoning capabilities to infer companion positions, maintain social distances, and understand group dynamics. The members of the group are first detected, and a perceptual module generates visual representations of the interaction group space as input to the VLM, which is then combined with a Model Predictive Path Integral (MPPI) controller to ensure stability and safety. Experimental evaluations across five scenarios show that the proposed method enables robots to accompany the group effectively, demonstrating a 15% improvement in success rate and a 25% reduction in collision rate compared to baseline approaches. Additionally, a user study indicates that the generated companionship behaviors are perceived as natural and socially appropriate.

This paper takes issue with the recent themes of both the RO-MAN and the HRI conferences for their portrayal of a future human-robot society as inevitable. The focus is on discussing how such statements ultimately shape research. By treating a future human-robot society as a fait accompli, license is given for user studies to imagine any scenario they like, no matter whether it has any ecological relevance, and to emphasise the scenario design over actually creating robot abilities needed to fullfill the imagined role. Meanwhile, research that focusses on actual societal needs, without assuming that robots are a solution, is deprioritised, as is technical development, in particular with respect to abilities that are necessary to enable robots that function as social agents rather than a mere automation of tasks. A frame that simply assumes a robot future not only detracts from scientific advancement in favour of a techno-solutionism we ought to resist, it is also self-defeating as it risks stifling the research needed to bring it about. We should therefore reject attempts to frame and promote the field in terms of the inevitable social robot and instead focus on one that facilitates advances in the field regardless of what the future holds. This paper suggests that a renewed focus on cognitive mechanisms necessary for the "I" in HRI would be a good starting point.