Visuomotor Resolution in Telerobotic Grasping with Transmission Delays

Weber’s law is among the basic psychophysical laws of human perception. It determines that human sensitivity to change along a physical dimension, the just noticeable difference (JND), is linearly related to stimulus intensity. Conversely, in direct (natural), visually-guided grasping, Weber’s law is violated, and the JND does not depend on stimulus intensity. The current work examines adherence to Weber’s law in telerobotic grasping. In direct grasping, perception and action are integrated for task performance. Conversely, in telerobotic control, there is an inherent spatial and temporal separation between perception and action. The understanding of perception-action association in such conditions may facilitate development of objective measures of telerobotic systems and contribute to improved interface design. Moreover, telerobotic systems offer a unique platform for examining underlying causes for the violation of Weber’s law during direct grasping. We examined whether, like direct grasping, telerobotic grasping with transmission delays violates Weber’s law. To this end, we examined perceptual assessment, grasp control, and grasp demonstration, using a telerobotic system with time delays in two spatial orientations: alongside and facing the robot. The examination framework was adapted to telerobotics from the framework used for examining Weber’s law in direct grasping. The variability of final grip apertures in perceptual assessment increased with object size in adherence with Weber’s law. Similarly, the variability of maximal grip apertures in grasp demonstration approached significance in adherence with Weber’s law. In grasp control, the variability of maximal grip apertures did not increase with object size, which seems to violate Weber’s law. However, unlike in direct grasping, motion trajectories were prolonged and fragmented, and included an atypical waiting period prior to finger closure. Therefore, in this condition, maximal grip aperture was an inappropriate indicator of JND. Instead, we calculated the aperture at the end of the opening phase, the initial grip aperture, and the final grip aperture at the beginning of the waiting period, as more appropriate JND indicators. The initial grip apertures adhered to Weber’s law. The final grip apertures approached significance in the same direction. This suggests that perception-action association during telerobotic grasping with transmission delays significantly diverge from direct grasping.

[1]  W. M. Smith,et al.  The effects of delayed and displaced visual feedback on motor control. , 1980, Journal of motor behavior.

[2]  Michael A. Khan,et al.  Vision for action and perception elicit dissociable adherence to Weber’s law across a range of ‘graspable’ target objects , 2017, Experimental Brain Research.

[3]  Marco Santello,et al.  Patterns of Hand Motion during Grasping and the Influence of Sensory Guidance , 2002, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[4]  N. Taniguchi,et al.  2. 3D simulation of the plane impinging jet , 1998 .

[5]  V. Franz,et al.  Semantic grasping escapes Weber's law , 2015, Neuropsychologia.

[6]  R. Miall,et al.  Digital Object Identifier (DOI) 10.1007/s002219900286 RESEARCH ARTICLE , 2022 .

[7]  T. Flash,et al.  The coordination of arm movements: an experimentally confirmed mathematical model , 1985, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

[8]  Gerd Hirzinger,et al.  Haptics in telerobotics , 2007, The Visual Computer.

[9]  J. F. Soechting,et al.  Coordination of arm and wrist motion during a reaching task , 1982, The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience.

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

[11]  H. Bülthoff,et al.  Driving in the future: temporal visuomotor adaptation and generalization. , 2001, Journal of vision.

[12]  Rajiv Ranganathan,et al.  Adaptation to visual feedback delay in a redundant motor task. , 2015, Journal of neurophysiology.

[13]  M. Heath,et al.  Manual estimations of functionally graspable target objects adhere to Weber’s law , 2017, Experimental Brain Research.

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

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

[16]  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.

[17]  Eli Brenner,et al.  Grasping Weber's law , 2008, Current Biology.

[18]  D. Westwood,et al.  Pantomime-grasping: the ‘return’ of haptic feedback supports the absolute specification of object size , 2015, Experimental Brain Research.

[19]  William R. Ferrell,et al.  Remote manipulation with transmission delay. , 1965 .

[20]  H. Kalmus,et al.  Effect of Delayed Acoustic Feed-back on some Non-vocal Activities , 1955, Nature.

[21]  Masaya Hirashima,et al.  Habituation to Feedback Delay Restores Degraded Visuomotor Adaptation by Altering Both Sensory Prediction Error and the Sensitivity of Adaptation to the Error , 2012, Front. Psychology.

[22]  Marieke Rohde,et al.  Time, agency, and sensory feedback delays during action , 2016, Current Opinion in Behavioral Sciences.

[23]  M. Ernst,et al.  Predictability is necessary for closed-loop visual feedback delay adaptation. , 2014, Journal of Vision.

[24]  Joan López-Moliner,et al.  Dealing with delays does not transfer across sensorimotor tasks. , 2014, Journal of vision.

[25]  Hiroshi Imamizu,et al.  Imposed visual feedback delay of an action changes mass perception based on the sensory prediction error , 2013, Front. Psychol..

[26]  Shirin Davarpanah Jazi,et al.  Pantomime-Grasping: Advance Knowledge of Haptic Feedback Availability Supports an Absolute Visuo-Haptic Calibration , 2016, Front. Hum. Neurosci..

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

[28]  J. R. Bloedel,et al.  Effects of accuracy constraints on reach-to-grasp movements in cerebellar patients , 2000, Experimental Brain Research.

[29]  Gabriel Baud-Bovy,et al.  Delayed visual feedback affects both manual tracking and grip force control when transporting a handheld object. , 2010, Journal of neurophysiology.

[30]  Ferdinando A. Mussa-Ivaldi,et al.  Representing delayed force feedback as a combination of current and delayed states. , 2017, Journal of neurophysiology.

[31]  T. Ganel,et al.  Weber’s law in 2D and 3D grasping , 2019, Psychological research.

[32]  M. Jeannerod Intersegmental coordination during reaching at natural visual objects , 1981 .

[33]  R. Held,et al.  Adaptation to displaced and delayed visual feedback from the hand. , 1966 .

[34]  D. Nozaki,et al.  Adaptation to Visual Feedback Delay Influences Visuomotor Learning , 2012, PloS one.

[35]  Robert L. Whitwell,et al.  Biomechanical constraints do not influence pantomime-grasping adherence to Weber’s law: A reply to Utz et al. (2015) , 2017, Vision Research.

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

[37]  E. Hoffmann Fitts' Law with transmission delay , 1992 .

[38]  M. Goodale,et al.  Separate visual pathways for perception and action , 1992, Trends in Neurosciences.

[39]  J. A. Scott Kelso,et al.  Temporal constraints in reaching and grasping behavior , 1990 .

[40]  E. Brenner,et al.  A new view on grasping. , 1999, Motor control.

[41]  Thomas B. Sheridan,et al.  Remote Manipulative Control with Transmission Delay , 1963 .

[42]  Ilana Nisky,et al.  Stimulation of PPC Affects the Mapping between Motion and Force Signals for Stiffness Perception But Not Motion Control , 2016, The Journal of Neuroscience.

[43]  E. Brenner,et al.  Independent movements of the digits in grasping , 2001, Experimental Brain Research.

[44]  T. Ganel Weber's law in grasping. , 2015, Journal of vision.

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

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

[47]  W M Smith Feedback: Real-Time Delayed Vision of One's Own Tracking Behavior , 1972, Science.

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

[49]  Y Morikiyo,et al.  Effects of Delayed Visual Feedback on Motor Control Performance , 1990, Perceptual and motor skills.

[50]  Peter T. Tkacik,et al.  Color Schlieren imaging of high-pressure overexpanded planar nozzle flow using a simple, low-cost test apparatus , 2011, J. Vis..

[51]  Hiroaki Gomi,et al.  What you feel is what you see: inverse dynamics estimation underlies the resistive sensation of a delayed cursor , 2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences.

[52]  John C. Baird,et al.  Fundamentals of scaling and psychophysics , 1978 .

[53]  M. Arbib,et al.  Grasping objects: the cortical mechanisms of visuomotor transformation , 1995, Trends in Neurosciences.

[54]  E. R. Crossman,et al.  Feedback Control of Hand-Movement and Fitts' Law , 1983, The Quarterly journal of experimental psychology. A, Human experimental psychology.

[55]  G. M. Gauthier,et al.  Oculo-manual coordination control: Ocular and manual tracking of visual targets with delayed visual feedback of the hand motion , 2004, Experimental Brain Research.

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

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

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

[59]  C. Hesse,et al.  Biomechanical factors may explain why grasping violates Weber’s law , 2015, Vision Research.

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