Teleoperator-Robot-Human Interaction in Manufacturing: Perspectives from Industry, Robot Manufacturers, and Researchers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OCCUPATIONAL APPLICATIONSIndustrial robots have become an important aspect in modern industry. In the context of human-robot collaboration, enabling teleoperated robots to work in close proximity to local/onsite humans can provide new opportunities to improve human engagement in a distributed workplace. Interviews with industry stakeholders highlighted several potential benefits of such teleoperator-robot-human collaboration (tRHC), including the application of tRHC to tasks requiring both expertise and manual dexterity (e.g., maintenance and highly skilled tasks in sectors including construction, manufacturing, and healthcare), as well as opportunities to expand job accessibility for individuals with disabilities and older individuals. However, interviewees also indicated potential challenges of tRHC, particularly related to human perception (e.g., perceiving remote environments), safety, and trust. Given these challenges, and the current limited information on the practical value and implementation of tRHC, we propose several future research directions, with a focus on human factors and ergonomics, to help realize the potential benefits of tRHC.
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 | 0.019 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".