Preliminary Results on Reducing the Workload of Assistive Vehicle Users: A Collaborative Driving Approach
- 173 Downloads
Nowadays, physically impaired people still struggle with daily tasks when using mobility aid devices, whether for crossing doors, parking or manoeuvring in their homes. In this context, assistive robotics can offer solutions to those problems, thus increasing the users’ quality of life. However, studies must be performed to determine the best architecture for human–robot interaction. In this work, we propose a collaborative navigation strategy for improving users’ skills for driving assistive vehicles. We present four navigation modes: manual, assisted manual, autonomous and assisted autonomous. In particular in the two assisted modes, the system is able to predict the user’s motion intentions, reducing his/her workload. The system was validated in a real world environment with a population of twenty volunteers. Objective and subjective metrics were used to asses the system’s performance and usability, with special consideration to human factors. Results show that the system aids users to perform navigation tasks in a clear and compliant manner using a robotic assistive vehicle, while decreasing their perceived workload by 15% for the assisted manual, 41% for the autonomous and 40% for the assisted autonomous, when compared to the manual mode. Additionally, it is shown that if autonomous navigation sets a lower bound for user workload, the system approximates this bound while improving performance.
KeywordsRehabilitation robotics Human–robot interaction Workload assessment
Compliance with Ethical Standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
The authors would like to thank DGIP, the BASAL Project FB0008, CONICYT FONDECYT Grant 1171431, and the Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María for their support.
In addition, all volunteers that participated in the trials and tested the interface, gave their voluntary consent.
- 1.Census Bureau U S (2014) Americans with disabilities: 2010 [Online], Oct 07. http://www.census.gov/people/disability/
- 8.Ray DN, Mukhopadhyay S, Majumder S (2009) A brief comparison between the subsumption architecture and motor schema theory in light of autonomous exploration by behavior based robots. In: 14th National conference on machines and mechanisms, pp 173–180Google Scholar
- 22.Steinfeld A, Fong T, Kaber D, Lewis M, Scholtz J, Schultz A, Goodrich M (2006) Common metrics for human–robot interaction. In: Proceedings 2006 ACM conference on human–Robot interaction, pp 33–40Google Scholar
- 23.Murphy R R, Schreckenghost D (2013) Survey of metrics for human–Robot interaction. In: Proceedings of the 8th ACM/IEEE international conference on human–robot interaction, pp 197–198Google Scholar
- 24.Meshkati N, Hancock PA, Rahimi M (1989) Techniques in mental workload assessment. In: Wilson J (ed) Evaluation of human work: practical ergonomics methodology. Taylor and Francis, London, pp 606–627Google Scholar
- 28.Urbano M, Fonseca J, Nunes U, Zeilinger H (2011) Extending a smart wheelchair navigation by stress sensors. In: IEEE 16th conference on emerging technologies and factory automation, pp 1–4Google Scholar
- 32.Ulrich I, Borenstein J (1998) Vfh+: reliable obstacle avoidance for fast mobile robots. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, May 1998, pp 1572–1577Google Scholar
- 33.Quinlan S, Khatib O (1993) Elastic bands: connecting path planning and control. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international conference on robotics and automation, pp 802–807Google Scholar