Orthographic Vision-based Interface with Motion-tracking System for Robot Arm Teleoperation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robot teleoperation is crucial for many hazardous situations such as handling radioactive materials, undersea exploration and firefighting. Visual feedback is essential to increase the operator's situation awareness and thus accurately teleoperate a robot. In addition, the control interface is equally important as the visual feedback for effective teleoperation. In this paper, we propose a simple and cost-effective orthographic visual interface for the teleoperation system by visualizing the remote environment to provide depth information using only a single inexpensive webcam. Further, we provide a simple modification to the control interface (Leap Motion) to achieve a wider workspace and make it more convenient for the user. To realize the merits of the proposed system, a comparison between the modified Leap Motion interface and traditional control modalities (i.e., joystick and keyboard) is conducted using both the proposed orthographic vision system and a traditional binocular vision system. We conduct a user study (N = 10) to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach to teleoperate a 6-DoF arm robot to carry out a pick and place task. The results show that the combination of Leap Motion with the orthographic visual system outperforms all other combinations.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".