AI 中文总结
本文指出人机交互中常将信任等同于联结是范畴错误，提出二者为独立维度并划分四种关系构型，进而阐述对感知人类状态的机器人学的四项启示，以推动重新评估人机关系质量。
AI 中文摘要
在人机交互中，关系质量常通过自我报告测量量化，尤其与“信任”相关，使得机器人的可信度成为衡量人类与其亲近程度或“联结”程度的指标。本文指出这是一个范畴错误：信任与社会联结是不同的构念，在 antecedents（前因）、时间尺度、身体特征、产生的人类体验、所需的机器人响应以及引发的伦理关切方面均存在差异。本文提出应将二者视为独立维度，并描述由此形成的可能关系状态的二维空间，其中包含四种构型：回避型、功能型、依赖型和共生型。随后，本文阐述了对感知人类状态的机器人学的若干启示：（1）社会联结是与信任不同的明确估计目标；（2）它应调节在线自适应；（3）它重新定义了“失败”的含义；（4）它为识别功能失调的关系提供了可能，即用户仍依附于不再值得信赖的机器人。这是一项正在进行的工作，部分目的是促使该领域重新思考评估人机二元组中关系质量的意义。
英文摘要
In human-robot interaction, relationship quality is often quantified using self-report measures, particularly related to "trust", such that a robot's trustworthiness comes to serve as an index of how close or "bonded" a human feels to it. I argue that this is a category error: trust and social bonding are distinct constructs, differing in their antecedents, their timescales, their bodily signatures, the human experience they produce, the robot responses they call for, and the ethical concerns they raise. I propose that we view them as independent dimensions, and describe the resulting two-dimensional space of possible relationship states under this view, with four configurations: avoidance, functional, dependence, and symbiosis. I then draw out some consequences for human-state-aware robotics: (1) social bonding is an explicit estimation target distinct from trust, (2) it should condition online adaptation (3) it reframes what a "failure" means, and (4) it raises the possibility of identifying dysfunctional relationships, in which a user remains attached to a robot that no longer merits reliance. This is ongoing work, offered in part to prompt the field to reconsider what it means to evaluate relationship quality in human-robot dyads.
CommentsPre-print, accepted at H-STAR Workshop, RO-MAN 2026, Kitakyushu
