Bio-Inspired Mechatronics and Control Interfaces

  • Panagiotis K. Artemiadis
  • Kostas J. Kyriakopoulos
Chapter
Part of the Springer Series in Cognitive and Neural Systems book series (SSCNS)

Abstract

There is great effort during the last decades toward building control interfaces for robots that are based on signals measured directly from the human body. In particular, electromyographic (EMG) signals from skeletal muscles have proved to be very informative regarding human motion, and therefore they are usually incorporated in control interfaces for robots that are either remotely operated or being worn by humans, i.e., arm exoskeletons. This chapter presents a methodology for estimating human arm motion using EMG signals from muscles of the upper limb, using a decoding method and an additional bio-inspired filtering technique based on a probabilistic model for arm motion. The method results in a robust human–robot control interface that can be used in many different kinds of robots (i.e., teleoperated robot arms, arm exoskeletons, prosthetic devices). The proposed methodology is assessed through real-time experiments in controlling a remote robot arm in random 3D movements using only EMG signals recorded from able-bodied subjects.

Keywords

Manifold Torque Covariance Kato Celani 

References

  1. Artemiadis PK, Kyriakopoulos KJ (2005) Teleoperation of a robot manipulator using EMG signals and a position tracker. Proc of IEEE/RSJ Int Conf Intelligent Robots and Systems pp 1003–1008Google Scholar
  2. Artemiadis PK, Kyriakopoulos KJ (2006) EMG-based teleoperation of a robot arm in planar catching movements using armax model and trajectory monitoring techniques. Proc of IEEE Int Conf on Robotics and Automation pp 3244–3249Google Scholar
  3. Artemiadis PK, Kyriakopoulos KJ (2007a) EMG-based position and force control of a robot arm: Application to teleoperation and orthosis. Proc of IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  4. Artemiadis PK, Kyriakopoulos KJ (2007b) EMG-based teleoperation of a robot arm using low-dimensional representation. Proc of IEEE/RSJ Int Conf Intelligent Robots and Systems pp 489–495Google Scholar
  5. Artemiadis PK, Kyriakopoulos KJ (2008) Assessment of muscle fatigue using a probabilistic framework for an EMG-based robot control scenario. Proc of IEEE Int Conf Bioinformatics and BioengineeringGoogle Scholar
  6. Artemiadis PK, Kyriakopoulos KJ (2009) EMG-based position and force control of coupled human-robot systems: Towards EMG-controlled exoskeletons. In Experimental Robotics, Springer Berlin/Heidelberg pp 241–250Google Scholar
  7. Artemiadis PK, Kyriakopoulos KJ (2010a) EMG-based control of a robot arm using low-dimensional embeddings. IEEE Transactions on Robotics 26(2):393–398CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Artemiadis PK, Kyriakopoulos KJ (2010b) An EMG-based robot control scheme robust to time-varying emg signal features. IEEE Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine 14(3):582–588CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. Billard A, Mataric MJ (2001) Learning human arm movements by imitation: Evaluation of a biologically inspired connectionist architecture. Robotics and Autonomous Systems 37:2–3:145–160CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bitzer S, van der Smagt P (2006) Learning EMG control of a robotic hand: towards active prostheses. Proc of IEEE Int Conf on Robotics and Automation pp 2819–2823Google Scholar
  11. Carmena JM, Lebedev MA, Crist RE, O’Doherty JE, Santucci DM, Dimitrov DF, Patil PG, C S Henriquez CS, Nicolelis MAL (2003) Learning to control a brain-machine interface for reaching and grasping by primates. PLoS, Biology 1:001–016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cavallaro E, Rosen J, Perry JC, Burns S, Hannaford B (2005) Hill-based model as a myoprocessor for a neural controlled powered exoskeleton arm- parameters optimization. Proc of IEEE Int Conf on Robotics and Automation pp 4514–4519Google Scholar
  13. Celani NML, Soria CM, Orosco EC, di Sciascio FA, Valentinuzzi ME (2007) Two-dimensional myoelectric control of a robotic arm for upper limb amputees. Journal of Physics: Conference Series 90Google Scholar
  14. Chow CK, Liu CN (1968) Approximating discrete probability distributions with dependence trees. IEEE Transactions on Information Theory 14(3):462–467CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Cram JR, Kasman GS (1998) Introduction to Surface Electromyography. Aspen Publishers, Gaithersburg, MarylandGoogle Scholar
  16. d’Avella A, Portone A, Fernandez L, Lacquaniti F (2006) Control of fast-reaching movements by muscle synergy combinations. The Journal of Neuroscience 25(30):7791–7810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Dipietro L, Ferraro M, Palazzolo JJ, Krebs HI, Volpe BT, Hogan N (2005) Customized interactive robotic treatment for stroke: EMG-triggered therapy. IEEE Transactions on Neural Systems and Rehabilitation Engineering 13(3):325–334CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Duda RO, Hart PE, Stork DG (2001) Pattern classification. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Farry KA, Walker ID, Baraniuk RG (1996) Myoelectric teleoperation of a complex robotic hand. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 12(5):775–788CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fod A, Mataric MJ, Jenkins OC (2002) Automated derivation of primitives for movement classification. Autonomous Robots 12(1):39–54CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Fukuda O, Tsuji T, Kaneko M, Otsuka A (2003) A human-assisting manipulator teleoperated by EMG signals and arm motions. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 19(2):210–222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Hill AV (1938) The heat of shortening and the dynamic constants of muscle. Proc R Soc Lond Biol pp 136–195Google Scholar
  23. Hiraiwa A, Shimohara K, Tokunaga Y (1989) EMG pattern analysis and classification by neural network. Proc of IEEE Int Conf Systems, Man, Cybernetics pp 1113–1115Google Scholar
  24. Huang HP, Chen CY (1999) Development of a myoelectric discrimination system for a multidegree prosthetic hand. Proc of IEEE Int Conf on Robotics and Automation pp 2392–2397Google Scholar
  25. Jackson JE (1991) A user’s guide to principal components. Wiley, New York, London, SydneyCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jacobson SC, Knutti DF, Johnson RT, Sears HH (1982) Development of the utah artificial arm. IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering 29(4):249–269CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Jerard RB, Williams TW, Ohlenbusch CW (1974) Practical design of an EMG controlled above elbow prosthesis. Proc of Conf Engineering Devices for Rehabilitation pp 73–73Google Scholar
  28. Jolliffe IT (2002) Principal component analysis. Springer, New York, Berlin, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  29. Kato I, Okazaki E, Kikuchi H, Iwanami K (1967) Electropneumatically controlled hand prosthesis using pattern recognition of myo-electric signals. In Dig 7th ICMBE pp 367–367Google Scholar
  30. Kazerooni H (1990) Human-robot interaction via the transfer of power and information signals. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 20(2):450–463CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Ljung L (1999) System identification: Theory for the user. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-HallGoogle Scholar
  32. Lloyd DG, Besier TF (2003) An EMG-driven musculoskeletal model to estimate muscle forces and knee joint moments in vivo. Journal of Biomechanics 36:765–776CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. Manal K, Buchanan TS, Shen X, Lloyd DG, Gonzalez RV (2002) Design of a real-time EMG driven virtual arm. Computers in Biology and Medicine 32:25–36CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. McLachlan G, Peel D (2000) Finite mixture models. Wiley, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Mpompos NA, Artemiadis PK, Oikonomopoulos AS, Kyriakopoulos KJ (2007) Modeling, full identification and control of the mitsubishi PA-10 robot arm. Proc of IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, SwitzerlandGoogle Scholar
  36. Mussa-Ivaldi FA, Bizzi E (2000) Motor learning: the combination of primitives. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 355:1755–1769CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Park J, Khatib O (2006) A haptic teleoperation approach based on contact force control. International Journal of Robotics Research 25(5-6):575–591Google Scholar
  38. Potvin J, Norman R, McGill S (1996) Mechanically corrected EMG for the continuous estimation of erector spine muscle loading during repetitive lifting. European Journal of Applied Physiology 74:119–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schulz S, Pylatiuk C, Reischl M, Martin J, Mikut R, Bretthauer G (2005) A hydraulically driven multifunctional prosthetic hand. Robotica 23:293–299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Scott RN, Parker PA (1988) Myoelectric prostheses: state of the art. Journal of Medical Engineering and Technology 12(4):143–151CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. Tenore F, Ramos A, Fahmy A, Acharya S, Etienne-Cummings R, Thakor N (2007) Towards the control of individual fingers of a prosthetic hand using surface EMG signals. Proc 29th Annual International Conference of the IEEE EMBS pp 6145–6148Google Scholar
  42. Woo-Keun Y, Goshozono T, Kawabe H, Kinami M, Tsumaki Y, Uchiyama M, Oda M, Doi T (2004) Model-based space robot teleoperation of ets-vii manipulator. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 20(3):602–612CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Xiang Y (2002) Probabilistic reasoning in multiagent systems: A graphical models approach. Cambridge University Press, Gaithersburg, MarylandCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zajac FE (1986) Muscle and tendon: Properties, models, scaling, and application to biomechanics and motor control. Bourne, J R ed CRC Critical Reviews in Biomedical Engineering 17:359–411Google Scholar
  45. Zecca M, Micera S, Carrozza MC, Dario P (2002) Control of multifunctional prosthetic hands by processing the electromyographic signal. Critical Reviews in Biomedical Engineering 30(4–6):459–485CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Panagiotis K. Artemiadis
    • 1
  • Kostas J. Kyriakopoulos
  1. 1.PostDoctoral AssociateMassachusetts Institute of TechnologyCambridgeUSA

Personalised recommendations