MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Elderly Bodily Assistance Robot (E-BAR): A Robot System for Body-Weight Support, Ambulation Assistance, and Fall Catching, Without the Use of a Harness

2025· article· en· W4413925213 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Roberto Bolli, H. Harry Asada

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship ProgramBruyère Research InstituteMassachusetts Institute of Technology
KeywordsRobotBar (unit)Computer scienceMobile robotPhysical medicine and rehabilitationSimulationHuman–computer interactionArtificial intelligenceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As over 11,000 people turn 65 each day in the U.S., our country, like many others, is facing growing challenges in caring for elderly persons, further exacerbated by a major shortfall of care workers. To address this, we introduce an elder-care robot (E-BAR) capable of lifting a human body, assisting with postural changes/ambulation, and catching a user during a fall, all without the use of any wearable device or harness. Our robot is the first to integrate these 3 tasks, and is capable of lifting the full weight of a human outside of the robot's base of support (across gaps and obstacles). In developing E-BAR, we interviewed nurses and care professionals and conducted userexperience tests with elderly persons. Based on their functional requirements, the design parameters were optimized using a computational model and trade-off analysis. We developed a novel 18-bar linkage to lift a person from a floor to a standing position along a natural trajectory, while providing maximal mechanical advantage at key points. An omnidirectional, nonholonomic drive base, in which the wheels could be oriented to passively maximize floor grip, enabled the robot to resist lateral forces without active compensation. With a minimum width of 38 cm, the robot's small footprint allowed it to navigate the typical home environment. Four airbags were used to catch and stabilize a user during a fall in <tex xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">$\leq \mathbf{2 5 0 ~ m s}$</tex>. We demonstrate E-BAR's utility in multiple typical home scenarios, including getting into/out of a bathtub, bending to reach for objects, sit-to-stand transitions, and ambulation.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.771
Threshold uncertainty score0.714

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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)0.0000.000

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.297 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Robot Interaction and HRIFrench-language works237,207