Formalizing Assistive Teleoperation

In assistive teleoperation, the robot helps the user accomplish the desired task, making teleoperation easier and more seamless. Rather than simply executing the user's input, which is hindered by the inadequacies of the interface, the robot attempts to predict the user's intent, and assists in accomplishing it. In this work, we are interested in the scientific underpinnings of assistance: we formalize assistance under the general framework of policy blending, show how previous work methods instantiate this formalism, and provide a principled analysis of its main components: prediction of user intent and its arbitration with the user input. We define the prediction problem, with foundations in Inverse Reinforcement Learning, discuss simplifying assumptions that make it tractable, and test these on data from users teleoperating a robotic manipulator under various circumstances. We propose that arbitration should be moderated by the confidence in the prediction. Our user study analyzes the effect of the arbitration type, together with the prediction correctness and the task difficulty, on the performance of assistance and the preferences of users.

[1]  Charles F. Schmidt,et al.  A Model of the Common-Sense Theory of Intention and Personal Causation , 1973, IJCAI.

[2]  Louis B. Rosenberg,et al.  Virtual fixtures: Perceptual tools for telerobotic manipulation , 1993, Proceedings of IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium.

[3]  Brenan J. McCarragher,et al.  Human integration into robot control utilising potential fields , 1997, Proceedings of International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[4]  John Platt,et al.  Probabilistic Outputs for Support vector Machines and Comparisons to Regularized Likelihood Methods , 1999 .

[5]  Robert A. Henning,et al.  Can Teams Outperform Individuals in a Simulated Dynamic Control Task? , 2000 .

[6]  Robert D. Howe,et al.  Cooperative Human and Machine Perception in Teleoperated Assembly , 2000, ISER.

[7]  Michael A. Goodrich,et al.  Characterizing efficiency of human robot interaction: a case study of shared-control teleoperation , 2002, IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[8]  Chrystopher L. Nehaniv,et al.  Imitation as a Dual-Route Process Featuring Predictive and Learning Components: A Biologically Plausible Computational Model , 2002 .

[9]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Effect of virtual fixture compliance on human-machine cooperative manipulation , 2002, IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[10]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Recognition of operator motions for real-time assistance using virtual fixtures , 2003, 11th Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, 2003. HAPTICS 2003. Proceedings..

[11]  Gregory D. Hager,et al.  Spatial motion constraints: theory and demonstrations for robot guidance using virtual fixtures , 2003, 2003 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (Cat. No.03CH37422).

[12]  Robert Platt,et al.  Extracting User Intent in Mixed Initiative Teleoperator Control , 2004 .

[13]  Jian Shen,et al.  Control System With Safe Obstacle Avoidance Capability , 2004 .

[14]  Pieter Abbeel,et al.  Apprenticeship learning via inverse reinforcement learning , 2004, ICML.

[15]  Christian Laugier,et al.  Intentional Motion Online Learning and Prediction , 2005, FSR.

[16]  Redwan Alqasemi,et al.  Telemanipulation Assistance Based on Motion Intention Recognition , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[17]  Jonathan Kofman,et al.  Teleoperation of a robot manipulator using a vision-based human-robot interface , 2005, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics.

[18]  Danica Kragic,et al.  Adaptive Virtual Fixtures for Machine-Assisted Teleoperation Tasks , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[19]  J. Andrew Bagnell,et al.  Maximum margin planning , 2006, ICML.

[20]  Christian Laugier,et al.  Intentional motion on-line learning and prediction , 2008, Machine Vision and Applications.

[21]  Vijay Kumar,et al.  Mixed Initiative Control of Autonomous Vehicles , 2007, Proceedings 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[22]  Anind K. Dey,et al.  Maximum Entropy Inverse Reinforcement Learning , 2008, AAAI.

[23]  Christian Smith,et al.  Teleoperation for a ball-catching task with significant dynamics , 2008, Neural Networks.

[24]  Siddhartha S. Srinivasa,et al.  Planning-based prediction for pedestrians , 2009, 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems.

[25]  Siddhartha S. Srinivasa,et al.  Learning from Experience in Manipulation Planning: Setting the Right Goals , 2011, ISRR.

[26]  Zhao Wang,et al.  How Autonomy Impacts Performance and Satisfaction: Results From a Study With Spinal Cord Injured Subjects Using an Assistive Robot , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans.

[27]  Leila Takayama,et al.  Strategies for human-in-the-loop robotic grasping , 2012, 2012 7th ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction (HRI).

[28]  Nicholas Roy,et al.  Assisted Teleoperation Strategies for Aggressively Controlling a Robot Arm with 2D Input , 2012 .