Contexts Matter: Robot-Aware 3D human motion prediction for Agentic AI-empowered Human-Robot collaboration
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Agentic AI-integrated robots are essential for effective, efficient, and safe Human-Robot collaboration (HRC), where robots must accurately interpret human behavior by understanding the working context. However, current human motion prediction models often focus on task-related context and rarely consider the robot as an influencing factor in HRC. This study navigates different contexts in human motion prediction for Agentic AI-empowered HRC, and proposes a robot-aware deep learning framework that integrates robot and task context into prediction. This framework handles context and human motions separately within a long short-term memory (LSTM)-based two-branch model to predict human motions in HRC tasks. The influence of different contextual information (e.g., robot actions, task-related object location) on prediction performance is also examined. The framework was implemented in a handover task and the results show that the proposed model improved performance by 7.95% in Average Displacement Error (ADE) and 8.74% in Final Displacement Error (FDE), compared to the baseline (i.e., without context). The findings indicate that context integration is critical for anticipating human motions, and the robot is an important context in HRC. This study advances the understanding of context integration in human motion prediction and contributes to the comprehension of AI-integrated robots in real-world HRC.
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it