Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash
139 tokens/sec
GPT-4o
7 tokens/sec
Gemini 2.5 Pro Pro
46 tokens/sec
o3 Pro
4 tokens/sec
GPT-4.1 Pro
38 tokens/sec
DeepSeek R1 via Azure Pro
28 tokens/sec
2000 character limit reached

User-customizable Shared Control for Robot Teleoperation via Virtual Reality (2403.13177v2)

Published 19 Mar 2024 in cs.RO

Abstract: Shared control can ease and enhance a human operator's ability to teleoperate robots, particularly for intricate tasks demanding fine control over multiple degrees of freedom. However, the arbitration process dictating how much autonomous assistance to administer in shared control can confuse novice operators and impede their understanding of the robot's behavior. To overcome these adverse side-effects, we propose a novel formulation of shared control that enables operators to tailor the arbitration to their unique capabilities and preferences. Unlike prior approaches to customizable shared control where users could indirectly modify the latent parameters of the arbitration function by issuing a feedback command, we instead make these parameters observable and directly editable via a virtual reality (VR) interface. We present our user-customizable shared control method for a teleoperation task in SE(3), known as the buzz wire game. A user study is conducted with participants teleoperating a robotic arm in VR to complete the game. The experiment spanned two weeks per subject to investigate longitudinal trends. Our findings reveal that users allowed to interactively tune the arbitration parameters across trials generalize well to adaptations in the task, exhibiting improvements in precision and fluency over direct teleoperation and conventional shared control.

Definition Search Book Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com
References (32)
  1. K. Darvish, L. Penco, J. Ramos, R. Cisneros, J. Pratt, E. Yoshida, S. Ivaldi, and D. Pucci, “Teleoperation of humanoid robots: A survey,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 2023.
  2. M. Selvaggio, M. Cognetti, S. Nikolaidis, S. Ivaldi, and B. Siciliano, “Autonomy in physical human-robot interaction: A brief survey,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 7989–7996, 2021.
  3. R. Luo, C. Wang, C. Keil, D. Nguyen, H. Mayne, S. Alt, E. Schwarm, E. Mendoza, T. Padır, and J. P. Whitney, “Team Northeastern’s Approach to ANA XPRIZE Avatar Final Testing: A Holistic Approach to Telepresence and Lessons Learned,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2023, pp. 7054–7060.
  4. D. P. Losey, C. G. McDonald, E. Battaglia, and M. K. O’Malley, “A Review of Intent Detection, Arbitration, and Communication Aspects of Shared Control for Physical Human–Robot Interaction,” Applied Mechanics Reviews, vol. 70, no. 1, 2018.
  5. M. K. O’Malley, A. Gupta, M. Gen, and Y. Li, “Shared Control in Haptic Systems for Performance Enhancement and Training,” Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement, and Control, vol. 128, no. 1, pp. 75–85, 2005.
  6. M. Zolotas and Y. Demiris, “Towards Explainable Shared Control using Augmented Reality,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2019, pp. 3020–3026.
  7. S. Musić and S. Hirche, “Control sharing in human-robot team interaction,” Annual Reviews in Control, vol. 44, pp. 342–354, 2017.
  8. B. D. Argall, “Autonomy in rehabilitation robotics: An intersection,” Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 441–463, 2018.
  9. D. Gopinath, S. Jain, and B. D. Argall, “Human-in-the-loop optimization of shared autonomy in assistive robotics,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 2, no. 1, pp. 247–254, 2017.
  10. M. Hagenow, E. Senft, R. Radwin, M. Gleicher, B. Mutlu, and M. Zinn, “Corrective Shared Autonomy for Addressing Task Variability,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 3720–3727, 2021.
  11. Y. Cui, S. Karamcheti, R. Palleti, N. Shivakumar, P. Liang, and D. Sadigh, “No, to the right: Online language corrections for robotic manipulation via shared autonomy,” in ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, 2023, pp. 93–101.
  12. J. C. A. Read, S. F. Begum, A. McDonald, and J. Trowbridge, “The Binocular Advantage in Visuomotor Tasks Involving Tools,” i-Perception, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 101–110, 2013.
  13. F. Budini, M. M. Lowery, M. Hutchinson, D. Bradley, L. Conroy, and G. De Vito, “Dexterity training improves manual precision in patients affected by essential tremor,” Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, vol. 95, no. 4, pp. 705–710, 2014.
  14. H. Schreuder, C. van den Berg, E. Hazebroek, R. Verheijen, and M. Schijven, “Laparoscopic skills training using inexpensive box trainers: which exercises to choose when constructing a validated training course,” BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, vol. 118, no. 13, pp. 1576–1584, 2011.
  15. M. J. A. Zeestraten, I. Havoutis, and S. Calinon, “Programming by demonstration for shared control with an application in teleoperation,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 3, no. 3, pp. 1848–1855, 2018.
  16. K. Fitzsimons, A. Kalinowska, J. P. Dewald, and T. D. Murphey, “Task-based hybrid shared control for training through forceful interaction,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 39, no. 9, pp. 1138–1154, 2020.
  17. R. Hetrick, N. Amerson, B. Kim, E. Rosen, E. J. d. Visser, and E. Phillips, “Comparing Virtual Reality Interfaces for the Teleoperation of Robots,” in Systems and Information Engineering Design Symposium, 2020, pp. 1–7.
  18. M. Zolotas, M. Wonsick, P. Long, and T. Padır, “Motion Polytopes in Virtual Reality for Shared Control in Remote Manipulation Applications,” Frontiers in Robotics and AI, vol. 8, p. 286, 2021.
  19. E. Babaians, D. Yang, M. Karimi, X. Xu, S. Ayvasik, and E. Steinbach, “Skill-cpd: Real-time skill refinement for shared autonomy in manipulator teleoperation,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2022, pp. 6189–6196.
  20. Q. Li, W. Chen, and J. Wang, “Dynamic shared control for human-wheelchair cooperation,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2011, pp. 4278–4283.
  21. A. D. Dragan and S. S. Srinivasa, “A policy-blending formalism for shared control,” The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 32, no. 7, pp. 790–805, 2013.
  22. M. Zurek, A. Bobu, D. S. Brown, and A. D. Dragan, “Situational confidence assistance for lifelong shared autonomy,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2021, pp. 2783–2789.
  23. A. U. Pehlivan, D. P. Losey, and M. K. O’Malley, “Minimal assist-as-needed controller for upper limb robotic rehabilitation,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 32, no. 1, pp. 113–124, 2016.
  24. S. Jain and B. Argall, “Probabilistic Human Intent Recognition for Shared Autonomy in Assistive Robotics,” ACM Transactions on Human-Robot Interaction, vol. 9, no. 1, 2019.
  25. C. X. Miller, T. Gebrekristos, M. Young, E. Montague, and B. Argall, “An analysis of human-robot information streams to inform dynamic autonomy allocation,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2021, pp. 1872–1878.
  26. C. Brooks and D. Szafir, “Visualization of intended assistance for acceptance of shared control,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2020, pp. 11 425–11 430.
  27. C. G. Christou, D. Michael-Grigoriou, and D. Sokratous, “Virtual Buzzwire: Assessment of a Prototype VR Game for Stroke Rehabilitation,” in IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces, 2018, pp. 531–532.
  28. U. Radhakrishnan, L. Kuang, K. Koumaditis, F. Chinello, and C. Pacchierotti, “Haptic feedback, performance and arousal: A comparison study in an immersive vr motor skill training task,” IEEE Transactions on Haptics, pp. 1–13, 2023.
  29. F. Flacco, T. Kröger, A. De Luca, and O. Khatib, “A depth space approach to human-robot collision avoidance,” in IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, 2012, pp. 338–345.
  30. N. Hogan and D. Sternad, “Sensitivity of smoothness measures to movement duration, amplitude, and arrests,” Journal of Motor Behavior, vol. 41, no. 6, pp. 529–534, 2009.
  31. S. Reddy, A. Dragan, and S. Levine, “Shared autonomy via deep reinforcement learning,” in Proceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems, 2018.
  32. H. J. Jeon, D. Losey, and D. Sadigh, “Shared autonomy with learned latent actions,” in Robotics: Science and Systems, 2020.
Citations (1)
View on Semantic Scholar

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Ai Sparkles Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com Summarize Now
X Twitter Logo Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Tweets