MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2766745932 · doi:10.1145/3125739.3125760

Humanoid Robot Instructors for Industrial Assembly Tasks

2017· article· en· W2766745932 on OpenAlexaff
Thomas Quitter, Ahmed E. Mostafa, D'Arcy Norman, André Miede, Ehud Sharlin, Patrick Finn

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanoid robotHuman–computer interactionProcess (computing)Computer scienceAssembly lineRobotQuality (philosophy)Simple (philosophy)MultimediaEngineeringArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are interested in the interactive aspects of deploying humanoid robots as instructors for industrial assembly tasks. Training for industrial assembly requires workers to become familiar with all steps of the assembly process, including learning and reproducing new tasks, before they can be employed in a production line. The derived challenges in current practice are limited availability of skilled instructors, and the need for attention to specific workers' training needs. In this paper, we propose the use of humanoid robots in teaching assembly tasks to workers while also providing a quality learning experience. We offer an assembly robotic instructor prototype based on a Baxter humanoid, and the results of a study conducted with the prototype teaching the assembly of a simple gearbox.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.006

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.237
GPT teacher head0.459
Teacher spread0.222 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Robot Interaction and HRIFrench-language works237,207