Embodied Supervision: Haptic Display of Automation Command to Improve Supervisory Performance (2402.18707v1)
Abstract: A human operator using a manual control interface has ready access to their own command signal, both by efference copy and proprioception. In contrast, a human supervisor typically relies on visual information alone. We propose supplying a supervisor with a copy of the operators command signal, hypothesizing improved performance, especially when that copy is provided through haptic display. We experimentally compared haptic with visual access to the command signal, quantifying the performance of N equals 10 participants attempting to determine which of three reference signals was being tracked by an operator. Results indicate an improved accuracy in identifying the tracked target when haptic display was available relative to visual display alone. We conjecture the benefit follows from the relationship of haptics to the supervisor's own experience, perhaps muscle memory, as an operator.
- L. Bainbridge, “Ironies of automation,” in Analysis, design and evaluation of man–machine systems. Elsevier, 1983, pp. 129–135.
- T. B. Sheridan, “Human supervisory control,” Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, pp. 990–1015, 2012.
- J. Y. Chen, M. J. Barnes, and M. Harper-Sciarini, “Supervisory control of multiple robots: Human-performance issues and user-interface design,” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews), vol. 41, no. 4, pp. 435–454, 2010.
- T. B. Sheridan, “Human–robot interaction: status and challenges,” Human factors, vol. 58, no. 4, pp. 525–532, 2016.
- B. Bridgeman, “Efference copy and its limitations,” Computers in biology and medicine, vol. 37, no. 7, pp. 924–929, 2007.
- H. Imamizu, “Prediction of sensorimotor feedback from the efference copy of motor commands: A review of behavioral and functional neuroimaging studies,” Japanese Psychological Research, vol. 52, no. 2, pp. 107–120, 2010.
- A. Rolnick and R. Lubow, “Why is the driver rarely motion sick? the role of controllability in motion sickness,” Ergonomics, vol. 34, no. 7, pp. 867–879, 1991.
- E. von Holst and H. Mittelstaedt, “The principle of reafference: Interactions between the central nervous system and the peripheral organs,” Perceptual processing: Stimulus equivalence and pattern recognition, pp. 41–72, 1971.
- M. Jeannerod and M. Arbib, “Action monitoring and forward control of movements,” The handbook of brain theory and neural networks, pp. 83–85, 2003.
- P. G. Griffiths and R. B. Gillespie, “Sharing control between humans and automation using haptic interface: Primary and secondary task performance benefits,” Human factors, vol. 47, no. 3, pp. 574–590, 2005.
- D. A. Abbink, M. Mulder, and E. R. Boer, “Haptic shared control: smoothly shifting control authority?” Cognition, Technology & Work, vol. 14, pp. 19–28, 2012.
- D. T. McRuer, “Human pilot dynamics in compensatory systems-theory, models, and experiments with controlled element and forcing function variations,” AFFDL-TR-65-15, 1965.
- D. T. McRuer and H. R. Jex, “A review of quasi-linear pilot models,” IEEE transactions on human factors in electronics, no. 3, pp. 231–249, 1967.
- D. T. McRuer and E. S. Krendel, “Mathematical models of human pilot behavior.” AGARD, 1974.
Paper Prompts
Sign up for free to create and run prompts on this paper using GPT-5.
Top Community Prompts
Collections
Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.
