Survey Report on Animal Computer Interaction (ACI) from 05 Research Papers

Survey Report on Animal Computer Interaction
(ACI)
Roohana Rehmat
Year Paper Problem statement Interface
2015 FIDO—Facilitatinginteractionsfordogswith
occupations:wearable communication
interfacesforworkingdogs
To researchfundamental aspects
of wearable technologiesto
supportcommunicationbetween
workingdogsandtheirhandlers
Wearable gadgets of
dogs
2016 Exploringmethodsforinteractiondesignwith
animals:a case-studywithValli
The goal of providingtechnology-
enhanced enrichmentforanAsian
elephantsothatshe can exercise
choice and control.
Guidelinesfor
developerstoshow
how interactiondesign
witha captive
elephantmightbe
approached.
2016 Searchand Rescue:Dog andHandler
CollaborationThroughWearable and Mobile
Interfaces
Allow humansanddogsto work
togethermore transparentlyand
effectivelywhile conducting
Searchand Rescue (SAR) missions.
SAR dogteamsare critical for
locatingmissingindividuals
Wearable gadgets,
Smartphone and
Application
2017 A Reporton the FirstInternational Workshop
on ResearchMethodsinAnimal-Computer
Interaction
Challengesfacedbythe ACI
communityasit worksto develop
ACIas a discipline,andon
importantopportunitiesforcross-
fertilizationbetweenHCIandACI
that the HCI communitycould
consider.
2017 Utilisingdog-computerinteractionstoprovide
mental stimulationindogsespeciallyduring
ageing
Ownersof olderdogsto reduce all
activitiessuchaswalking,playing
and training,since theirdogmay
appearto no longerneedthem.
2018 SevenYearsafterthe Manifesto:Literature
ReviewandResearchDirectionsfor
TechnologiesinAnimal ComputerInteraction
The questioningwhatitmeansto
be animal by consideringthe
impactand loopbetweenmachine
and animal interactivity.
animal centered
design
usabilityforanimals
ABSTRACT:
As technologies diversify and become embedded in
everyday lives, the technologies we display to animals,
and the new technologies being developed for animals
with the ﬁeld of Animal Computer Interaction (ACI)
are increasing
Search and Rescue (SAR) may be a critical component
of disaster recovery efforts. Every second saved within
the search increases the probabilities to find survivors
and therefore the majority of teams prefer using
canines. Their goal is to assist enable SAR dog and
handler teams to figure together more effectively.
Gathering data by conducting semi-structured
interviews and guidance from SAR experts as they
iterate through designs, SAR develops a two-part
wearable computer interface system for working SAR
dogs and they communicate with their handler via a
mobile application. Additionally, SAR discusses the
system around a heuristic framework that has dogs as
active participants. Finally, they show the viability of a
tool by evaluating it with feedback from 3 SAR
experts.

Keywords: Interaction design, animal computer
Interaction, Canine Interfaces,Dog to Handler,
Communication, Search and Rescue System
1. INTRODUCTION:
The main goal of the FIDO project is to research the
basic aspects of wearable technologies to support
communication from working dogs to their handlers.
We integrated electronics into dog clothing to form
canine user interfaces and performed a pilot study of 4
different sensors. From the results of the pilot study,
we created five new wearable sensor designs. This
paper summarizes the pilot study and details the results
of testing the new designs with eight trained dogs. We
evaluated and compared the sensors with a range of
metrics, including training time, ease of interaction,
error rate, and false-positive rate. [3]
Animal-computer interaction has catalyzed the
creation of computer-aided systems that might allow
humans and dogs to figure together more transparently
and effectively while conducting Search and Rescue
(SAR) missions. SAR dog teams are critical for
locating missing individuals within the wilderness and
within the aftermath of natural disasters or mass
casualty events. Search and rescue dogs detect human
scent in conditions unfavorable to human vision, like
low visibility environments (dark or highly obstructed)
and at far distances. Their scent-detection capabilities,
their agility at speeds greater than their human
counterparts, and their ability to listen to at higher
ranges, help increase efficiency and success rate of
non-canine SAR teams.[5]
When humans keep animals in captivity for any
reason, it's then a requirement of care enshrined in law
to confirm that their well-being is maintained.
Additionally as keeping the animals physically healthy
and psychologically as free from distress as possible,
this responsibility also includes ensuring that they need
the freedom to specific their normal (non-captive)
behaviors. To the current end, animal keepers and
carers often provide environmental enrichment for
their captive animals, aimed toward enhancing their
well-being by encouraging them to behave as naturally
as possible within the confines of their enclosures. [1]
Animal-Computer Interaction (ACI) is an emerging
discipline planning to develop user-centric interactions
between animals and technology. Exploring such
interactions contributes to our understanding of animal
behavior and has important applications, e.g., for the
development of technologies that may support the
activities of working dogs during training and
deployment, or that can provide environmental and
cognitive enrichment for animals in captivity through
various kinds of positive stimulation and
entertainment; or for the look of technologies for
conservation and other animal research which will
minimize the impact of human interventions on the
animals involved. [2]
The well-being, behaviors’, and physical
characteristics of animals have long been studied
within animal biology sciences but the landscape
changes because the understanding of animals evolves.
within the late twentieth century, studies were
conducted into the ways in which some animals
behave in human-animal situations and subsequently,
these studies have moved towards the flexibility of
animals to help humans and thus improve the human
condition As technology has become embedded within
the human condition, it's also become of interest in
terms of how it affects the human-animal relation
planning to move far from anthropocentric work
towards an animal-centric focus. Technology today has
been shown to be useful for playful interactions
between humans and animals, for monitoring animals,
training animals and supporting animals that take care
of humans. This has driven researchers,for societal
and economic reasons,to explore animals within
technological situations. Recent research in animal-
computer interaction has catalyzed the creation of
computer-aided systems that might allow humans and
dogs to figure together more transparently and
effectively while conducting Search and Rescue (SAR)
missions. SAR dog teams are critical for locating
missing individuals within the wilderness and in the
aftermath of natural disasters or mass casualty events.
Search and rescue dogs detect human scent in
conditions unfavorable to human. [2]
1.1 NON-HUMAN INTERACTION
WITH TECHNOLOGY
The well-being, behaviors, and physical characteristics
of animals have long been studied within animal
biology sciences but the landscape changes because
the understanding of animals evolves. Within the late
twentieth century, studies were conducted into the
ways in which some animals behave in human-animal
situations and subsequently, these studies have moved
towards the ability of animals to assist humans and
thus improve the human condition [3].
As technology has become embedded within the
human condition, it's also become of interest in terms

of how it affects the human-animal relation planning to
move far from anthropocentric work towards an
animal-centric focus. Technology today has been
shown to be useful for playful interactions between
humans and animals, for monitoring animals, training
animals and supporting animals that take care of
humans. This has driven researchers,for societal and
economic reasons,to explore animals within
technological situations. [4]
One of the most initial aims for the study of Animal
Computer Interaction (ACI) has been “to understand
the interaction between animals and computing
technology within the contexts during which animals
habitually live, are active, and socialize with members
of a similar or other species, including humans”. As a
relatively new field, being coined in 2011 within the
ACI Manifesto, it's taken its main reference from
Human Computer Interaction (HCI), which in turn has
led to an early concentrate on studies of the usability
of technology and therefore the user experience of
animals to influence the look of interactive solutions.
Frameworks are constructed for ACI technology
within the areas of interaction design, Human
Computer Interaction (HCI),ubiquitous computing
and game design. A number of these frameworks aim
to reveal the role of technology within a human-animal
interaction, whilst others aim to reduce the human role
to more fully design for the animals’ unique needs.
Whilst motivation for animal-computer technologies is
commonly welfare-based,ACI also attends to other
aspects,including the pet entertainment and holistic
well-being sectors where many commercially available
products exist. The terminology of welfare we use
within this work isn't only in reference towards the
animal is healthy, nourished, safe,able to express
innate behavior, comfortable and not affected by any
negative states (as defined by medical agencies) but
also in viewing the animal as a ‘whole’. Within ACI,
welfare is inherently linked to animal centeredness by
researchers who allow consent through walking away
behavior (innate behavior), research into a way to
make systems more suitable for animals (comfortable),
and infrequently seeking ways to observe health
(healthy and nourished). [4]
2. CLASSIFICATION
2.0.1 ANIMAL FOR SAR USING
VARIABLE TECHNOLOGY
Search and rescue is an activity defined as “the search
for people who are in distress or imminent danger”
although in some cases,cadaver searches also are
grouped within this category. Although specific
definitions vary by jurisdiction, the general field of
search and rescue includes many specialty areas
typically characterized by the kind of terrain over
which the search is conducted. These areas include:
• Mountain/wilderness rescue
• Ground search and rescue
• Urban search and rescue in cities (USAR)
• Combat search and rescue on the battlefield
To establish user needs and to urge feedback on our
proposed SAR system we held semi-structured
interviews with nine professional volunteer SAR
handlers. [5]
2.0.1.1 CURRENT
TECHNOLOGY USE:
The current use of technical systems, like GPS, to help
in search and rescue varies greatly with each team.
Most SAR teams are comprised of voluntary members
and technology isn't provided by the organizations they
belong to. SAR teams that receive technology grants
typically obtain GPS receivers and handheld radio
equipment additionally to Smartphone. The radio
equipment and phones are used to communicate with
other teams within the near vicinity to coordinate their
efforts. Teams that can't or prefer to not use computing
technology consider paper maps and compasses. Our
group of SAR experts also uses the TNP Terrain
Navigator Pro to assist mark areas they need searched
and to provide reports they're required to produce to
law enforcement once the search is complete. They use
One Call Now to call out to their SAR volunteer phone
tree. Usefulmobile applications they listed were:
• Koredoko - provides the GPS coordinates from an
image taken on a mobile phone. If an individual is lost,
but has a cell phone, they take an image and text it to
law enforcement. The image is opened with Koredoko
and it opens a Google map with the location of where
the photo was taken,with latitude and longitude
coordinates, alongside additional useful information.
• Map Tools: coordinate system conversion between
latitude/longitude, Universal Transverse Mercator,and
National Geodetic Survey coordinates.
• Microsoft OneNote: note-taking and freehand
drawing

• Evernote: note taking, photo integration into a
document
• Google maps: location identification and directions
to a search area,looking at past satellite views of an
area [5]
2.0.1.2 SAR TASK SCENARIO
WITHOUT TECHNOLOGY
An active search and rescue could have many different
results depending on many different variables. we have
produced a whole task map too detailed to be outlined
here, however,we are going to present a typical search
and rescue scenario.
Figure 1: A SAR dog leaves his handler’s sight and
returns to alert he has found someone, “ping-ponging”
back and forth. [5]
2.0.1.3 SAR TASK ANALYSIS
2.0.1.3.1 TASK
ENVIRONMENT
Disaster dogs are used to locate victims of catastrophic
or mass-casualty events (e.g.,earthquakes, landslides,
building collapses, aviation incidents). Although SAR
dogs are often utilized in urban environments, like
large, controlled settings (hospitals, factories, and
airports) we are going to concentrate on SAR dogs that
work outdoors. Additionally to rescue and recovery,
outdoor SAR dogs can even perform wilderness,
disaster, cadaver,avalanche, and drowning searches.
In wilderness SAR applications, air-scenting dogs will
be deployed to high-probability areas. These are places
where the topic or target has the potential to be, or
places where the subject's scent may collect, or “pool”,
like in drainage canals within the early morning.
Tracking/trailing dogs are often deployed from the
subject's last known point (LKP) or the location of a
discovered clue. Handlers must be capable of bush
navigation, wilderness survival techniques, and must
be self-sufficient. The dogs must be able to work for 4
to 8 hours without distraction (e.g., by wildlife).
Disaster dogs rely totally on air scent and will be
limited in mass-casualty events by their inability to
differentiate between survivors and recently deceased
victims.[5]
2.0.1.3.2 WEATHER
Weather is a crucial factor that influences scent travel.
Scent molecules are typically denser than air, but less
dense than water. As a result, the temperature may
result in “lifting and dropping” the scent, leaving
"pools", and also the humidity can “bog down” scents.
These phenomena will be studied using smoke to
check the impact of airflow (indoors and out) and the
effects of temperatures on the terrain.
Generally, dogs are called out right before the
atmospheric condition is expected to deteriorate. This
is often because the human search parties refuse to
continue at this point and calling the dogs is that the
last and only alternative.[5].
2.0.1.3.3 WIND
The direction of the wind is additionally a very
important factor in determining search plans. Teams
typically start searches downwind and “grid” across
the wind to permit dogs to perceive the scent as it's
blowing. If a whole search is performed upwind from a
victim, teams are likely to finish up going past the
victim and so having to backtrack when the dogs
detect the scent downwind. Dogs detect which nostril
perceives the most scent and use this to see which way
the scent is traveling towards them. Nevertheless,
winds within the southeastern us change directions
frequently, so teams must take this under
consideration.
2.1 EMERGENCYANIMALS FOR SAR
2.1.1 HOME
In parallel to the rise in interest in human brain
training, recently there has been a surge of interest in
cognitive training and enrichment for dogs, which can
be implemented by dog owners in the home
environment.

Figure 1: Schematic diagram of the touch screen
apparatus, including: Feeder box (containing food
dispenser and computer/laptop), movable doors to
block out distractions, and adjustable computer touch
screen. Treats are dispensed through a tube from the
feeder box, or a feeding device such as the Treat &
Train can be used to dispense treats at a distance. Top
left: Photograph of the food dispenser used in the
studies. Bottom right: Treat & Train automatic food
dispenser with remote control. [6]
2.1.2 GENERAL OUTDOOR
DOG ACTIVATION
During a typical SAR scenario, Dog Worker is trained
to alert the handler that he has found something of
interest. During this case,the dog would bite the
capacitive sensor at his side (Figure 7). Notice the bite
sensor is that the same shape and size of a bringsel,
which follows our second heuristic Match between
system and therefore the real world. Upon activation,
the dog’s system beeps a tone, notifying the dog that
he has made a successfulactivation (the dog is trained
to know this tone as a reward marker and because of
the completion of a task). Also upon activation, the
dog’s vest would send an indication through the
mobile phone to the handler’s Smartphone, including
the GPS data and activation information.[5]
Figure 7: Border collie activating a capacitive sensor
SYSTEM DESIGN: MOBILE HUMAN
INTERFACE
The human interface for monitoring the location of
dogs and activities is an application that runs on an
Android platform. The application works on all GPS-
enabled Android cell phones and tablets, but currently
requires a device which will pick up cellular service
while within the field. The SAR handler application
(Figure 8 & 9) shows the dog's location with respect to
the handler’s location on a map. The application also
shows a compass and generalwind direction, as
gathered from local weather data. What differs about
the program from other GPS tracking systems is that
the ability of the system to mark searched locations
and receives input from the SAR dog. [5]
PROPOSED SOLUTION INTERFACE:
SYSTEM DESIGN: OUR SAR DOG VEST
Figure 1: SAR working wearable computer vest

Figure 2: SAR Handler Interface showing dog
location, handler location, wind direction and compass.
Figure 3: SAR Handler Interface showing a dog
activation, and also a note entered by the handler.
2.2 FOODS REQUIRED
THE TOUCHSCREEN APPARATUS
The touch screen apparatus consists of a laptop, a 15”
TFT computer monitor that's mounted behind an
infrared touch frame, and a feeding device that
distributes treats (Figure 1). An infrared touch frame
was chosen as the most suitable choice to be used with
dogs since it allowed for a level of moisture, and saliva
from the nose presses of dogs, whilst still functioning.
However,dogs with excess saliva may end in the
touch frame becoming unresponsive; therefore,the
screen should be wiped regularly to avoid this
occurring. The monitor and touch frame will be slid up
and down to adjust to the height of the dog. The center
of the screen should be located at the dog’s eye level
(Figure 2). The feeding device was designed and built
by Wolfgang Berger from the Messerli Research
Institute and contained a wheelwith 32 holes, which
rotated to release a single treat when the dog touched
the proper stimulus. Since this system was complicated
to design and make, required regular maintenance, and
was limited within the number of treats that will be
dispensed, severaladditional options exist regarding
feeding devices, which enable a more multi-functional
approach. The “Treat & Train”, which is relatively
inexpensive and commercially available from Pet Safe,
utilizes a remote control that the owner/trainer can
press to dispense a single treat. [6]
2.2.1 HOMEALONEDOGS
TRAINING PROCEDURE
Here we are going to concentrate on the preliminary
steps necessary to train a dog to interact with the touch
screen. The dog receives a training program consisting
of severalphases of progressive complexity. The goal
of the auto-shaping and pre-training procedures is to
familiarize dogs with the touch screen apparatus and
therefore the food dispenser (Phase 1),to teach them to
the touch a stimulus on the screen,first at a fixed
location (Phase 2),then at varying locations (Phase 3).
Then finally, to select an image from two or more to
get a reward (discrimination training, Phase 4). Only
then can the dogs start to resolve tougher cognitive
tasks, which may further examine their learning,
memory and logical reasoning skills. Students and
research assistants,a number of which had
considerable previous dog training experience trained
the dogs at our labs. All were briefly instructed within
the basics of the different training techniques,
however, needed some practice before perfecting their
training skills. Therefore,after we discuss with a
“trainer” within the text, we denote someone who has
an understanding of how to train dogs, and a good
knowledge of the individual dogs being trained.
Phase 1 Familiarization with the touch screen
apparatus and also the food dispenser Owners brought
their dogs to the lab once a week and participated in
three to four sessions, over a half-hour period, with
short breaks in between sessions. Initially, the trainer
had to assist the dog using a sort of techniques (such as
shaping, target training, and luring), to approach the
apparatus and therefore the screen,which is of course,
not a natural behavior for the dog, and additionally, the
dog needed to find out the way to use the feeding
device. We found that during this early stage, the
movable doors at the front of the touch screen should

be positioned in a wide-open position, so the dog and
the trainer can approach the front of the apparatus
unimpeded. The quickest method to familiarize the
dog with the apparatus is to use luring, which consists
of the use of food to guide the dog into a desired
position or behavior.
Phase 2 Touch a stimulus on the screen (fixed
location) within the approach training, which consists
of the presentation of one stimulus, when the stimulus
is touched, the infrared grid on the touch frame is
interrupted, which triggers an acoustic signal and,
within the case of an automatic system, the delivery of
a food treat. The training requires that the dog learns
the association between touching the image – and
gaining a food reward. From our experience of testing
dogs with many various picture stimuli, and from the
dog’s visual capabilities, we've determined that a
stimulus with a roughly circular global shape and blue
and yellow in color is particular eye-catching for dogs,
and is an honest starting stimulus. For dogs conversant
in shaping and therefore the touch command, during a
final step, the dog is often rewarded for touching the
stimulus on the screen. The finger is often wont to lure
the dog to the screen,and to urge it to touch the screen
within the correct location.
Phase 3 Touch a stimulus on the screen (varying
locations) in a very slight change to the approach
training, the position of the stimulus is randomly
alternated between the left of centre and right of centre
positions. a similar training technique as detailed in
Phase 2 will be implemented. Once the dog learns to
the touch precisely the stimulus, the trainer can slowly
reduce the number of paste that is applied to the
screen,until the paste is not any longer necessary. At
this point, the dog generally switches to a nose press,
rather than a lick. The movable doors at the front of
the touch screen should be slowly closed, to make sure
that the dog stands correctly, and to reduce outside
disturbance. Several visits could also be necessary to
achieve this stage, but if the dog becomes confused,
and does not offer the proper behavior after prompting,
the use of the paste will be reinitiated until the dog
reliably executes the touch action, and immediately
goes to the dispenser to receive a food reward. By the
end of the Phase 3 training, the dog should
successfully complete one session (30 trials) with no
help from the trainer.
Phase 4 Discrimination training in the final training
step, using a forced two-choice procedure (which just
means the dog must press one of two possible stimuli),
the software presents one positive picture stimulus
(S+) and one negative picture stimulus (S−),
positioned randomly on the left and right side from
trial to trial (for an example, please see Figure 2 and
3). When the positive stimulus is touched, stimuli
disappear, a short tone is emitted by the computer, and
a food reward is provided. If the incorrect stimulus is
touched (S−), stimuli disappear, a short buzz sounds
and a red “time out” screen is presented for 3 seconds.
in this case,a correction trial is immediately initiated:
the stimuli of the previous trial are presented again in
the same position as previously. If the dog makes an
accurate choice,the trial terminates and ends up in a
food reward and the presentation of a new trial. A
second incorrect response results in an additional
correction trial.[6]
2.3 PLAYING WITH TOUCH SCREEN
Figure 4: Apps for Apes: An orangutan using a touch
screen [4]
Figure 5: Human and orangutan playing together with
a touch screen interface [4].
2.3.1 ANIMALS AND GAMES
Animals have operated machines since the time of
Skinner; Animal-Computer Interfaces (ACI) is
relatively new. Recently, there has been interesting
work on ‘‘interspecies interaction,’’ including games,
remote monitoring, and remote interaction. Games like
‘‘Cat Cat Revolution’’ and ‘‘Feline Fun Park’’ allow
humans to play with cats mediated by computing. The
‘‘Canine Amusement and Training’’ (CAT) system
focuses on games as the simplest way to teach humans
to train and interact with dogs. Remote interaction

systems allow people to observe, care for, and play
with their pets at home when they are away. Dog-
mounted GPS and video cameras can give their owners
a perspective on the dog’s experiences in the
household and hunters an improved view of their
working dogs’ activities. Researchers have trained
dogs to take commands from a speaker worn on his
body. While a number of these studies support handler
to dog communication or monitoring, they have not yet
explored dog to handler interactions.[3]
PILOT STUDY
They performed a pilot study to see the types of
sensors dogs can most easily understand and
activate. They based four different sensor designs
on natural capabilities of dogs biting, tugging, and
touching with the nose. Because dogs naturally
explore their environment predominantly with their
noses and mouths, they opted to design sensors for
nose and mouth interaction instead of paws or other
body parts. [3]
PILOT STUDYRESULTS SUMMARY
In terms of dog accuracy,which measures a dog's
understanding of the way to activate the sensor, the
rectangle bite sensor was the best. This result may be
attributed to the actualfact that all of the dogs were
previously trained to retrieve, so biting and holding an
object was a natural interaction for them. In terms of
sensor accuracy (i.e.,when the dogs attempted to
activate the sensor properly, the action registered as
intended), the proximity sensor was highly reliable.
However,it also exhibited the greatest number of false
positives. This increased rate illustrates a predictable
trade-off between accidental activation and easy
activation. Similarly, the oval bite sensor data show a
trade-off between reach ability and easy activation.
The longer the sensor hung from the vest, the simpler
it had been to achieve, while also becoming more
susceptible to the dog lying on that. Previous training
had a profound effect on the bite sensor results.
Service dogs that had been trained to perform a
precision retrieve (such as finding out dropped objects
or pulling off their handler’s socks) often did not bite
hard enough to activate the sensors. The agility-trained
dogs had far more success with their more vigorous
bite. However,the service dog’s (R1) precision
retrieve was a bonus on the tug sensor, with overall
accuracy of 100 percent. His steady, controlled tugging
action produced the most effective results. Dogs with
more vigorous tug training tended to accidentally
activate the sensor multiple times, which was
penalized by our accuracy metrics. to enhance the tug
sensor, a more robust and flexible design that might be
calibrated for the dogs’ tug strength would improve
performance [3]
2.4 OTHER ANIMALS
DOG TRAINING METHOD
The two dog handlers are both very experienced
animal trainers. The first (author Jackson) has been
training dogs and horses for over 40 years; she has
raised and trained assistance dogs for Canine
Companions for Independence for the last 20 years and
is now also competing at national levels in dog agility.
The second trainer (author Currier) also has extensive
experience with dogs and horses and is currently a
professional dog agility trainer with over 18 years
working in dog obedience, behavior modification, and
agility. The two handlers worked together in testing all
of the dogs for consistency.
For both the pilot and the follow-on studies, we
selected dog subjects trained in certain skills: hand-
target (touch the handler’s hand with the nose),
retrieve (grasp an object and bite down gently), and
tugging (grasp an object and pull). All of the dogs had
already been trained with operant conditioning
techniques, specifically shaping, which is building new
behaviors by selectively reinforcing behaviors the dog
offers. For these experiments, we only used positive
reinforcement; we did not employ correction or
punishment. Positive reinforcement has been shown to
extend the likelihood of dogs offering novel behaviors,
which is very important when training a dog for a task
he has never performed before. Punishment or
correction can discourage a dog from offering new
behaviors.
Initially, we classically conditioned the dogs with
high-value reinforcement (food) to a reward marker,a
clicker. By marking desired behaviors with the clicker
at the moment of execution, we shaped the dogs
toward the ultimate interaction goal for each sensor.
Because each sensor produced a tone when activated,
the dogs learned during training that the tone was truth
reward marker,and they would work very hard to
produce it.
All of the dogs we tested were already aware of ‘‘tug’’
and ‘‘get it’’ (retrieve) commands. So as to begin
training the dogs with a well-known task, we started
each dog with off-body interactions with each sensor.
The handler presented the sensor to the dog and

verbally encouraged him to interact with it. When the
dog offered an appropriate behavior (for example,
taking a bite sensor in his mouth), the behavior was
marked and also the dog received a reward. Next,the
dog was required to bite harder on the sensor to
receive a treat, until the sensor was activated. All of
the dogs learned to operate each sensor in a very
matter of minutes with this method. [3]
LITERATURE REVIEW:
[1]This case study describes our progress towards the
goal of providing technology-enhanced enrichment for
an Asian elephant so that she can exercise choice and
control. We offer guidelines for developers to show
how interaction design with a captive elephant might
be approached.
In this paper author’s goals were to design and develop
a device that encouraged playful behavior, offered
cognitive and sensory enrichment, enabled control
over an aspect of the environment, was intrinsically
motivating and was easy to use. This case-study
describes our progress towards these goals and offers
some guidelines for those interested in developing
interactive systems for animals. To avoid the need for
training, it is important to allow the animal to discover
the functionality of the system independently. This
makes it easier to assess whether goals have been met,
because the animal’s behavior is not being affected by
keeper expectations or the promise of a treat.
[2] In this paper author claims it seems that the field of
ACI has reached the level of maturity at which a
critical look at the research methods used is needed
Life with robots and other non-humans: between
animals and technology. Exploring such
Operation with the ACM. A reflection was thus
interactions contributes to our understanding of animal
Particularly timely on the achievements to date of ACI
behavior and has important applications, e.g., for the
as a scientific field, the identity of the ACI community,
development of technologies that can support the ways
of shaping it in the future, and crucially what the
activities of working dogs during training and
development of ACI might mean for HCI
[3]In this paper Working dogs have improved the lives
of thousands of people throughout history. However,
communication between human and canine partners is
currently limited. The main goal of the FIDO project is
to research fundamental aspects of wearable
technologies to support communication between
working dogs and their handlers. In this study, the
FIDO team investigated on-body interfaces for dogs in
the form of wearable technology integrated into
assistance dog vests. We created ﬁve different sensors
that dogs could activate based on natural dog
behaviors such as biting, tugging, and nose touches.
We then tested the sensors on-body with eight dogs
previously trained for a variety of occupations and
compared their effectiveness in several dimensions.
We were able to demonstrate that it is possible to
create wearable sensors that dogs can reliably activate
on command, and to determine cognitive and physical
factors that affect dogs’ success with body–worn
interaction technology.
The results of the FIDO studies are extremely
encouraging; we demonstrated that it is possible to
create wearable electronics that dogs can reliably
activate to communicate with their handlers.
This technology could easily be adapted to other
canine professionals, for police work (bomb and drug
sniffing dogs could report their ﬁnds) and military
working dogs who could communicate the location
and type of Improvised Explosive Devices (IEDs).
Providing dogs with the ability to communicate clearly
to humans opens a myriad of possibilities.
[4]As technologies diversify and become embedded in
everyday lives, the technologies we expose to animals,
and the new technologies being developed for animals
within the field of Animal Computer Interaction (ACI)
are increasing. As we approach seven years since the
ACI manifesto, which grounded the field within
Human Computer Interaction and Computer Science,
this thematic literature review looks at the technologies
developed for (non-human) animals. Technologies that
are analyzed include tangible and physical, hepatic and
wearable,olfactory, screen technology and tracking
systems. The conversation explores what exactly ACI
is whilst questioning what it means to be animal by
considering the impact and loop between machine and
animal interactivity. The findings of this review are
expected to form the first grounding foundation of ACI
technologies informing future research in animal
computing as well as suggesting future areas for
exploration. This literature has identified technologies
used in ACI to support both human to animal, animal
to human and animal to robotic communication via
computerized systems
[5]Search and Rescue (SAR) is a critical component of
disaster recovery efforts. Every second saved in the

search increases the chances of finding survivors and
the majority of these teams prefer using canines. Our
goal is to help enable SAR dog and handler teams to
work together more effectively. Using a semi-
structured interviews and guidance from K9-SAR
experts as we iterate through designs, we develop a
two-part system consisting of a wearable computer
interface for working SAR dogs that communicates
with their handler via a mobile application.
Additionally, we discuss the system around a heuristic
framework that includes dogs as active participants.
Finally, we show the viability of our tool by evaluating
it with feedback from three SAR experts. After
building feedback into our system, our next step is to
create a user study to determine how well our
prototype will work during extensive use in the field
8. CONCLUSION:
Gaps were observed within tangible and physical
systems to investigate new training paradigms so
animals can use systems more efficiently, and to look
further at how animals respond to the interfaces that
they hold and use. It is instead a question of the
boundary of how much implementation of technology,
the application of these developments and the
interaction paradigms that need to be carefully
explored.
9. FUTURE WORK:
After building feedback into our system, next step is to
create a user study to determine how well prototype
will work during extensive use in the field. There
might also be an opportunity to combine some of
Bozkurt’s wearable dog and environmental monitoring
and remote human to dog communication. Combined
with newer data on a dog’s ability to feel and
understand hepatic input we could move towards
creating a system where the handler could guide the
dog remote.
10 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
We would like to express our gratitude to the National
Science Foundation for supporting this work and Miss
Nazish Nouman their support on research
productivity.
REFERENCES:
[1]French.F, Mancini.C, Helen Sharp ,”Exploring
methods for interaction design with animals”, ACI '16,
November 16 - 17, 2016, Milton Keynes,United
Kingdom Copyright is held by the owner/author(s).
Publication rights licensed to ACM. ACM 978-1-
4503-4758-7/16/11...$15.00
[2]Emily C. Collins,Carol Hall,Hanna Wirman
,Amanda Roshier,”A Report on the First International
workshop on Research Methods in Animal computer
Interaction”,alt.chi: Life with robots and other non-
humans CHI 2017, May 6–11, 2017, Denver,CO,
USA .
[3] Melody M. Jackson ,Giancarlo Valentin ,Larry
Freil , Lily Burkeen ,Clint Zeagler ,Scott Gilliland
,Barbara Currier ,Thad Starner,“FIDO—Facilitating
interactions for dogs with occupations: wearable
communication interfaces for working dogs “,2017
[4]Ilyena Hirskyj-Douglas 1
, Patricia Pons 2 ID
, Janet
C. Read 3
and Javier Jaen 4
”Seven Years after the
Manifesto: a Literature Review and Research
Directions for Technologies in Animal Computer
Interaction”,Received: 18 April 2018; Accepted:28
May 2018; Published: 1 June 2018
[5]Clint Zeagler ,Ceara Byrne ,Giancarlo Valentin
,Larry Freil ,Eric Kidder ,James Crouch, Thad
Starner,Melody Moore Jackson ” Search and Rescue:
Dog and Handler Collaboration Through Wearable and
Mobile Interfaces”,ACI '16,November 16-17, 2016,
Milton Keynes,United Kingdom © 2016 ACM. ISBN
978-1-4503-4758-7/16/11
[6] Wallis, L. J.,Range, F., Kubinyi, E., Chapagain,
D., Serra,J., & Huber, L. (2017). Utilising dog-
computer interactions to provide mental stimulation in
dogs especially during ageing. Proceedings of the
Fourth International Conference on Animal-Computer
Interaction - ACI2017. doi:10.1145/3152130.3152146

Survey Report on Animal Computer Interaction (ACI) from 05 Research Papers

More Related Content

Similar to Survey Report on Animal Computer Interaction (ACI) from 05 Research Papers (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Survey Report on Animal Computer Interaction (ACI) from 05 Research Papers