MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Extended Reality for Enhanced Human-Robot Collaboration: a Human-in-the-Loop Approach

2024· article· en· W4403920057 on OpenAlexaff
Yehor Karpichev, Todd Charter, Jayden Hong, Amir M. Soufi Enayati, Homayoun Honari, Mehran Ghafarian Tamizi, Homayoun Najjaran

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman–robot interactionHuman–computer interactionRobotHuman-in-the-loopComputer scienceLoop (graph theory)Augmented realityArtificial intelligenceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rise of automation has provided an opportunity to achieve higher efficiency in manufacturing processes, yet it often compromises the flexibility required to promptly respond to evolving market needs and meet the demand for customization. Human-robot collaboration attempts to tackle these challenges by combining the strength and precision of machines with human ingenuity and perceptual understanding. In this paper, we conceptualize and propose an implementation framework for an autonomous, machine learning-based manipulator that incorporates human-in-the-loop principles and leverages Extended Reality (XR) to facilitate intuitive communication and programming between humans and robots. Furthermore, the conceptual framework foresees human involvement directly in the robot learning process, resulting in higher adaptability and task generalization. The paper highlights key technologies enabling the proposed framework, emphasizing the importance of developing the digital ecosystem as a whole. Additionally, we review the existent implementation approaches of XR in human-robot collaboration, showcasing diverse perspectives and methodologies. The challenges and future outlooks are discussed, delving into the major obstacles and potential research avenues of XR for more natural human-robot interaction and integration in the industrial landscape.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.908
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.374 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHuman-Automation Interaction and SafetyFrench-language works237,207