The scaling of the gripper affects the action and perception in teleoperated grasping via a robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery system

We use psychophysics to investigate human-centered transparency of grasping in unilateral robot-assisted minimally invasive surgery (RAMIS) without force feedback. Instead of the classical definition of transparency, we define here a human-centered transparency, focusing on natural action and perception in RAMIS. Demonstrating this approach, we assess the effect of gripper scaling on human-centered transparency in teleoperated grasping of rigid objects. Thirty-one participants were divided into three groups, with different scaling between the opening of the gripper of the surgeon-side manipulator and the gripper of the surgical instrument. Each participant performed two experiments: (1) action experiment: reaching and grasping of different cylinders; and (2) perception experiment: reporting the size of the cylinders. In two out of three gripper scaling, teleoperated grasping was similar to natural grasping. In the action experiment, the maximal grip aperture of the surgical instrument was proportional to the size of the grasped object, and its variability did not depend on object size, whereas in the perception experiment, consistently with Weber's law, variability of perceived size increased with size. In the fine gripper scaling, action and perception variabilities decreased with size, suggesting reduced transparency. These results suggest that in our RAMIS system, if the gripper scaling is not too fine, grasping kinematics and the gap between action and perception are similar to natural grasping. This means that in the context of grasping, our system induces natural grasping behavior and is human-centered transparent. We anticipate that using psychophysics for optimizing human-centered teleoperation control will eventually improve the usability of RAMIS.

[1]  Blake Hannaford,et al.  The RAVEN: Design and Validation of a Telesurgery System , 2009, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[2]  A. Karniel,et al.  Feedback and feedforward adaptation to visuomotor delay during reaching and slicing movements , 2013, The European journal of neuroscience.

[3]  J. Flanagan,et al.  Independence of perceptual and sensorimotor predictions in the size–weight illusion , 2000, Nature Neuroscience.

[4]  Blake Hannaford,et al.  Dynamically evaluated gravity compensation for the RAVEN surgical robot , 2014, 2014 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[5]  M. Schijven,et al.  The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review , 2009, Surgical Endoscopy.

[6]  Ferdinando A. Mussa-Ivaldi,et al.  Perception and Action in Teleoperated Needle Insertion , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Haptics.

[7]  M. Goodale,et al.  Visual control of action but not perception requires analytical processing of object shape , 2003, Nature.

[8]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Teleoperated versus open needle driving: Kinematic analysis of experienced surgeons and novice users , 2015, 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA).

[9]  J. Kaouk,et al.  Fundamental skills of robotic surgery: a multi-institutional randomized controlled trial for validation of a simulation-based curriculum. , 2013, Urology.

[10]  L. Jakobson,et al.  Differences in the visual control of pantomimed and natural grasping movements , 1994, Neuropsychologia.

[11]  Dale A. Lawrence.  Stability and transparency in bilateral teleoperation , 1993, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[12]  Tzvi Ganel,et al.  Bimanual grasping does not adhere to Weber’s law , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[13]  Tzvi Ganel,et al.  Visual coding for action violates fundamental psychophysical principles , 2008, Current Biology.

[14]  M. Goodale,et al.  Size-contrast illusions deceive the eye but not the hand , 1995, Current Biology.

[15]  Tzvi Ganel,et al.  Action is immune to the effects of Weber's law throughout the entire grasping trajectory. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[16]  Bartlomiej Stanczyk,et al.  Development of a telerobotic system for exploration of hazardous environments , 2004, 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (IEEE Cat. No.04CH37566).

[17]  Melvyn A. Goodale,et al.  The Effect of Pictorial Illusion on Prehension and Perception , 1998, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience.

[18]  Septimiu E. Salcudean,et al.  Transparency in time-delayed systems and the effect of local force feedback for transparent teleoperation , 2002, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[19]  Ilana Nisky,et al.  Perception of Stiffness with Force Feedback Delay , 2014, Multisensory Softness.

[20]  Allison M. Okamura,et al.  Training in divergent and convergent force fields during 6-DOF teleoperation with a robot-assisted surgical system , 2017, 2017 IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC).

[21]  Jacques Marescaux,et al.  Transatlantic robot-assisted telesurgery , 2001, Nature.

[22]  Cyril Burt.  GUSTAV THEODOR FECHNER ELEMENTE DER PSYCHOPHYSIK 1860 , 1960 .

[23]  M. A. Goodale,et al.  Practice makes perfect, but only with the right hand: Sensitivity to perceptual illusions with awkward grasps decreases with practice in the right but not the left hand , 2008, Neuropsychologia.

[24]  P. Fitts.  The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. , 1954, Journal of experimental psychology.

[25]  M. Heath,et al.  Goal-directed grasping: The dimensional properties of an object influence the nature of the visual information mediating aperture shaping , 2013, Brain and Cognition.

[26]  Melvyn A Goodale,et al.  Independent effects of pictorial displays on perception and action , 2000, Vision Research.

[27]  M. Jeannerod.  The timing of natural prehension movements. , 1984, Journal of motor behavior.

[28]  Sunil M Prasad,et al.  Surgical robotics: impact of motion scaling on task performance. , 2004, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[29]  Thomas Langø,et al.  European association of endoscopic surgeons (EAES) consensus statement on the use of robotics in general surgery , 2015, Surgical Endoscopy.

[30]  Li-Ming Su,et al.  Laparoscopic and robotic assisted radical prostatectomy--critical analysis of the results. , 2006, European urology.

[31]  Ilana Nisky,et al.  The effect of force feedback delay on stiffness perception and grip force modulation during tool-mediated interaction with elastic force fields. , 2015, Journal of neurophysiology.

[32]  Christine L. MacKenzie,et al.  Functional relationships between grasp and transport components in a prehension task , 1990 .

[33]  A. Wing,et al.  Grasp size and accuracy of approach in reaching. , 1986, Journal of motor behavior.

[34]  David B. Camarillo,et al.  Robotic technology in surgery: past, present, and future. , 2004, American journal of surgery.

[35]  Dennis A Nowak,et al.  Different modes of grip force control: voluntary and externally guided arm movements with a hand-held load , 2004, Clinical Neurophysiology.

[36]  Raz Leib,et al.  The Mechanical Representation of Temporal Delays , 2017, Scientific Reports.

[37]  Carter Q. Le,et al.  Laparoscopic and robotic radical prostatectomy , 2006, Expert review of anticancer therapy.

[38]  Eugene Tunik,et al.  Coordination of pincer grasp and transport after mechanical perturbation of the index finger. , 2017, Journal of neurophysiology.

[39]  Blake Hannaford,et al.  Raven-II: An Open Platform for Surgical Robotics Research , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering.

[40]  Ferdinando A. Mussa-Ivaldi,et al.  Analytical Study of Perceptual and Motor Transparency in Bilateral Teleoperation , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Human-Machine Systems.

[41]  Erez Freud,et al.  Visual control of action directed toward two-dimensional objects relies on holistic processing of object shape , 2015, Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.

[42]  J. Flanagan,et al.  The stability of precision grip forces during cyclic arm movements with a hand-held load , 1990, Experimental Brain Research.