FMG- and RNN-Based Estimation of Motor Intention of Upper-Limb Motion in Human-Robot Collaboration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on human-robot interactions has been driven by the increasing employment of robotic manipulators in manufacturing and production. Toward developing more effective human-robot collaboration during shared tasks, this paper proposes an interaction scheme by employing machine learning algorithms to interpret biosignals acquired from the human user and accordingly planning the robot reaction. More specifically, a force myography (FMG) band was wrapped around the user's forearm and was used to collect information about muscle contractions during a set of collaborative tasks between the user and an industrial robot. A recurrent neural network model was trained to estimate the user's hand movement pattern based on the collected FMG data to determine whether the performed motion was random or intended as part of the predefined collaborative tasks. Experimental evaluation during two practical collaboration scenarios demonstrated that the trained model could successfully estimate the category of hand motion, i.e., intended or random, such that the robot either assisted with performing the task or changed its course of action to avoid collision. Furthermore, proximity sensors were mounted on the robotic arm to investigate if monitoring the distance between the user and the robot had an effect on the outcome of the collaborative effort. While further investigation is required to rigorously establish the safety of the human worker, this study demonstrates the potential of FMG-based wearable technologies to enhance human-robot collaboration in industrial settings.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".