Analytical and Psychophysical Comparison of Bilateral Teleoperators for Enhanced Perceptual Performance

This paper focuses on the human perception capabilities for haptic interaction with remote environments. The perception capabilities are compared for two well-known control methods with two kinds of haptic cues. Analytical and psychophysical methods are used to analyze the performance. The first control method aims at maximizing the transparency of the remote interactions (i.e., transparency-based method), whereas the second one aims at maximizing the detection and discrimination abilities of the human operator (i.e., perception-based method). For each of these two control methods, two kinds of haptic cues are studied, which use position and force cues from remote environments. Hybrid matrix formulation is employed, and it is analyzed in the frequency domain for these studies. Psychophysical experiments are then conducted for human-centered evaluation and comparison of the control methods. Analytical and experimental results clearly show that the perception-based method, when compared with the transparency-based method, enhances the human operator's perceptual capabilities of remote environments irrespective of force cues. For each of the two control methods, the force cues always contribute more to the increase in perceptual sensitivity when compared with the case of position cues.

[1]  Mark W. Spong,et al.  Bilateral teleoperation: An historical survey , 2006, Autom..

[2]  Roberto Oboe,et al.  Experimental Analysis of an Internet-Based Bilateral Teleoperation System With Motion and Force Scaling Using a Model Predictive Controller , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics.

[3]  R. W. Daniel,et al.  Fundamental Limits of Performance for Force Reflecting Teleoperation , 1998, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[4]  Marco Vicentini,et al.  Perception-centric Force Scaling in Bilateral Teleoperation , 2010 .

[5]  Doo Yong Lee,et al.  Psychophysical evaluation of control scheme designed for optimal kinesthetic perception in scaled teleoperation , 2010, 2010 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[6]  Doo Yong Lee,et al.  Gain-Scheduling Control of Teleoperation Systems Interacting With Soft Tissues , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics.

[7]  Simon S. Haykin,et al.  Active Network Theory. , 1970 .

[8]  David S. Ebert,et al.  Haptic Identification of Stiffness and Force Magnitude , 2008, 2008 Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems.

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

[10]  Hideki Hashimoto,et al.  Effect of Impedance-Shaping on Perception of Soft Tissues in Macro-Micro Teleoperation , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics.

[11]  I. Hunter,et al.  A perceptual analysis of viscosity , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[12]  G. Gescheider Psychophysics: The Fundamentals , 1997 .

[13]  I. Hunter,et al.  A perceptual analysis of stiffness , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

[14]  Shahin Sirouspour,et al.  Nonlinear and Filtered Force/Position Mappings in Bilateral Teleoperation With Application to Enhanced Stiffness Discrimination , 2009, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[15]  Toshio Tsuji,et al.  Human hand impedance characteristics during maintained posture , 1995, Biological Cybernetics.

[16]  Alana Sherman,et al.  Design of bilateral teleoperation controllers for haptic exploration and telemanipulation of soft environments , 2002, IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom..

[17]  Angel Rubio,et al.  Experimental quantitative comparison of different control architectures for master-slave teleoperation , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology.

[18]  Septimiu E. Salcudean,et al.  Analysis of Control Architectures for Teleoperation Systems with Impedance/Admittance Master and Slave Manipulators , 2001, Int. J. Robotics Res..

[19]  L. Jones Kinesthetic Sensing , 2000 .

[20]  Antonio Franchi,et al.  Human-Centered Design and Evaluation of Haptic Cueing for Teleoperation of Multiple Mobile Robots , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.

[21]  Alin Albu-Schäffer,et al.  DLR MiroSurge: a versatile system for research in endoscopic telesurgery , 2010, International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery.

[22]  Jee-Hwan Ryu,et al.  Time Domain Passivity Control for Position-Position Teleoperation Architectures , 2010, PRESENCE: Teleoperators and Virtual Environments.

[23]  Antonio Franchi,et al.  Bilateral Teleoperation of Groups of Mobile Robots With Time-Varying Topology , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Robotics.

[24]  Grigore C. Burdea,et al.  Force and Touch Feedback for Virtual Reality , 1996 .

[25]  Woojin Ahn,et al.  Haptic Interface of the KAIST-Ewha Colonoscopy Simulator II , 2008, IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine.

[26]  Doo Yong Lee,et al.  Estimation of environmental force for the haptic interface of robotic surgery , 2010, The international journal of medical robotics + computer assisted surgery : MRCAS.

[27]  Hong Z. Tan,et al.  Force constancy and its effect on haptic perception of virtual surfaces , 2005, TAP.

[28]  Frank Tendick,et al.  Frequency Dependence of Compliance Contrast Detection , 2000, Dynamic Systems and Control: Volume 2.

[29]  H. Hashimoto,et al.  Enhancement in Operator's Perception of Soft Tissues and Its Experimental Validation for Scaled Teleoperation Systems , 2011, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics.

[30]  M A Srinivasan,et al.  Manual discrimination of compliance using active pinch grasp: The roles of force and work cues , 1995, Perception & psychophysics.

[31]  Stefano Stramigioli,et al.  Stability of position-based bilateral telemanipulation systems by damping injection , 2012, 2012 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation.

[32]  Vincent Hayward,et al.  Perception of simulated local shapes using active and passive touch. , 2009, Journal of neurophysiology.