Report from Dagstuhl Seminar 20021 Spoken Language Interaction with Virtual Agents and Robots (SLIVAR): Towards Effective and Ethical Interaction
Report from Dagstuhl Seminar 20021 Spoken Language Interaction with Virtual Agents and Robots (SLIVAR): Towards Effective and Ethical Interaction
This report documents the outcomes of Dagstuhl Seminar 20021 on Spoken Language Interaction with Virtual Agents and Robots (SLIVAR), held in January 2020. It brings together world experts on spoken language processing and human-robot interaction to review open research questions, propose evaluation protocols, investigate data sharing, and examine ethical and societal issues. The seminar highlights the necessity of aligning visual, vocal, behavioral, and cognitive affordances to avoid the uncanny valley and bridge the habitability gap in human-machine interactions.
Summary and content fields are drawn from the document text and are pending editorial review.
Who issued it
Who it governs
This report is for researchers, academics, and developers working at the intersection of spoken language processing, robotics, and artificial intelligence ethics.
What the document contains
The document addresses the integration of spoken language processing and human-robot interaction, technical architectures for multimodal systems, evaluation protocols, ethical implications of affective computing and social robots, and open research problems in dialogue management.
It contains no legally binding regulations, statutory compliance mandates, or enforceable enforcement mechanisms for AI deployment.
- Spoken language processing and human-robot interaction communities need closer collaboration to establish a distinct SLIVAR research community.
- The visual, vocal, behavioral, and cognitive affordances of artificial agents must be aligned to avoid the uncanny valley effect and bridge the habitability gap.
- Ethical issues such as trust, manipulation through affective computing, nudging, and liability require careful design and evaluation frameworks.
- Developing computational models of interactional intelligence and incremental multimodal processing is crucial for natural conversational dynamics.
- Standardized evaluation metrics and protocols are currently lacking in robotics compared to speech technology and need urgent development.
· Executive Summary · Overview of Stimulus Talks · Show and Tell · Individual Contributions from Participants · Participants
How it scores
Each score is backed by a quote verified against the document text. Editorial review has not yet confirmed them.
Accountability
3/5Clear responsibility for AI outcomes
The question of liability arises for designers and trainers of virtual conversational agents.
3.1 Executive Summary / Ethics
screening score · 2026-10-23
Fairness
3/5Non-discrimination and equitable treatment
2. Learning bias: Some of the virtual agent models are trained from data selected by a “coach” (human agent in charge of selecting them). The agent can be discriminating, not fair if the data are badly chosen.
3.1 Executive Summary / Ethics
screening score · 2026-10-23
Human Dignity
3/5Respect for the inherent worth of persons
Some ethical principles have been proposed by the EU experts: Beneficence: promoting well-being, preserving dignity, and sustaining the planet
3.1 Executive Summary / Ethics
screening score · 2026-10-23
Human Oversight
1/5Humans remain in control of consequential decisions
Autonomy: the power to decide
3.1 Executive Summary / Ethics
screening score · 2026-10-23
Privacy
2/5Protection of personal data and private life
Non-maleficence: privacy, security and “capability caution”
3.1 Executive Summary / Ethics
screening score · 2026-10-23
Transparency
3/5Openness about how AI systems work and are used
Transparency and Explicability: enabling the other principles through intelligibility and accountability
3.1 Executive Summary / Ethics
screening score · 2026-10-23
Enforcement
0/5Consequences and compliance mechanisms with real force
screening score · 2026-10-23
Impact Assessment
4/5Required assessment of an AI system's risks/impacts before or during use
Our aim is to study these interactions and relationships, in order to audit and measure the potential influence of affective systems on humans, and finally to go towards a conception of “ethical systems by design” and to propose evaluation measures.
3.1 Executive Summary / Ethics
screening score · 2026-10-23