Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A New Difficulty Index for Teleoperated Robots Driving through Obstacles

How Environment Difficulty, Communication Delay and Autonomy Level Affect Performance

  • Published:
Journal of Intelligent & Robotic Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Teleoperation allows humans to reach environments that would otherwise be too difficult or dangerous. The distance between the human operator and remote robot introduces a number of issues that can negatively impact system performance including degraded and delayed information exchange between the robot and human. Some operation scenarios and environments can tolerate these degraded conditions, while others cannot. However, little work has been done to investigate how factors such as communication delay, automation, and environment characteristics interact to affect teleoperation system performance. This paper presents results from a user study analyzing the effects of teleoperation factors including communication delay, autonomous assistance, and environment layout on user performance. A mobile robot driving task is considered in which subjects drive a robot to a goal location around obstacles as quickly (minimize time) and safely (avoid collisions) as possible. An environment difficulty index (ID) is defined in the paper and is shown to be able to predict the average time it takes for the human to drive the robot to a goal location with different obstacle configurations. The ID is also shown to predict the path chosen by the human better than travel time along that path.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Unmanned ground vehicles: Core capabilities & market background. Tech. rep., The Association for Unmanned Vehicle Systems International (AUVSI) (2013). https://goo.gl/EZxVnU

  2. Anderson, S.J., Walker, J.M., Iagnemma, K.: Experimental performance analysis of a homotopy-based shared autonomy framework. IEEE Trans. Human-Mach. Syst. 44(2), 190–199 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., Walker, S.: lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using eigen and s4. R package version 1(4) (2014)

  4. Bates, D.M.: lme4: Mixed-effects modeling with R. http://lme4.r-forge.r-project.org/book (2010)

  5. Carona, R., Aguiar, A.P., Gaspar, J.: Control of unicycle type robots tracking, path following and point stabilization. In: Proceedings of IV Jornadas de Engenharia Electrónica e Telecomunicações e de Computadores, Lisbon, Portugal, pp. 180–185. Citeseer (2008)

  6. Chen, J.Y., Haas, E.C., Barnes, M.J.: Human performance issues and user interface design for teleoperated robots. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Part C Appl. Rev. 37(6), 1231–1245 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Durst, P.J., Goodin, C., Cummins, C., Gates, B., Mckinley, B., George, T., Rohde, M.M., Toschlog, M.A., Crawford, J.: A real-time, interactive simulation environment for unmanned ground vehicles: The autonomous navigation virtual environment laboratory (ANVEL). In: 5th International Conference on Information and Computing Science (ICIC), Liverpool, UK, pp. 7–10. IEEE (2012)

  8. Fitts, P.M.: The information capacity of the human motor system in controlling the amplitude of movement. J. Exp. Psychol. 47(6), 381 (1954)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Goodrich, M.A., Olsen, D.R., Crandall, J., Palmer, T.J.: Experiments in adjustable autonomy. In: Proceedings of IJCAI Workshop on Autonomy, Delegation and Control: Interacting with Intelligent Agents, pp. 1624–1629 (2001)

  10. Guizzo, E.: Three engineers, hundreds of robots, one warehouse. IEEE Spectr. 45(7), 26–34 (2008)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Helton, W.S., Head, J., Blaschke, B.A.: Cornering law: The difficulty of negotiating corners with an unmanned ground vehicle. Human Factors: The J. Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 56(2), 392–402 (2014)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Jax, S.A., Rosenbaum, D.A., Vaughan, J.: Extending Fitts’ Law to manual obstacle avoidance. Exp. Brain Res. 180(4), 775–779 (2007)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Jones, K.S., Johnson, B.R., Schmidlin, E.A.: Teleoperation through apertures passability versus driveability. J. Cogn. Eng. Decis. Mak. 5(1), 10–28 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kron, A., Schmidt, G., Petzold, B., Zah, M.I., Hinterseer, P., Steinbach, E.: Disposal of explosive ordnances by use of a bimanual haptic telepresence system. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), New Orleans, USA, vol. 2, pp. 1968–1973. IEEE (2004)

  15. Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P.B., Christensen, R.H.B.: lmertest: Tests for random and fixed effects for linear mixed effect models (lmer objects of lme4 package). R package version 2(6) (2013)

  16. Lampe, A., Chatila, R.: Performance measure for the evaluation of mobile robot autonomy. In: IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA), Orlando, USA, pp. 4057–4062. IEEE (2006)

  17. Liu, L., van Liere, R.: The effect of varying path properties in path steering tasks. In: Proceedings of the 16th Eurographics Conference on Virtual Environments & Second Joint Virtual Reality, Stuttgart, Germany, pp. 9–16 (2010)

  18. Liu, Y., Nejat, G.: Robotic urban search and rescue: A survey from the control perspective. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 72(2), 147–165 (2013)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Luck, J.P., McDermott, P.L., Allender, L., Russell, D.C.: An investigation of real world control of robotic assets under communication latency. In: Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Salt Lake City, USA, pp. 202–209. ACM (2006)

  20. MacKenzie, I.S., Ware, C.: Lag as a determinant of human performance in interactive systems. In: Proceedings of the INTERACT and CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Amsterdam, Netherlands, pp. 488–493. ACM (1993)

  21. Marge, M., Powers, A., Brookshire, J., Jay, T., Jenkins, O.C., Geyer, C.: Comparing heads-up, hands-free operation of ground robots to teleoperation. Robotics: Sci. Syst. VII 7, 193 (2012)

    Google Scholar 

  22. McWilliams, G.T., Brown, M.A., Lamm, R.D., Guerra, C.J., Avery, P.A., Kozak, K.C., Surampudi, B.: Evaluation of autonomy in recent ground vehicles using the autonomy levels for unmanned systems (ALFUS) framework. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Performance Metrics for Intelligent Systems, Washington, USA, pp. 54–61. ACM (2007)

  23. Sheik-Nainar, M.A., Kaber, D.B., Chow, M.Y.: Control gain adaptation in virtual reality mediated human–telerobot interaction. Hum. Factors Ergon. Manuf. Serv. Ind. 15(3), 259–274 (2005)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Sheridan, T.B., Ferrell, W.R.: Remote manipulative control with transmission delay. IEEE Trans. Human Factors Elect. HFE-4(1), 25–29 (1963)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Shuttleworth, M.: Counterbalanced measures design. Explorable.com. http://explorable.com/counterbalanced-measures-design (2009)

  26. Slawiñski, E., Mut, V.: Control scheme including prediction and augmented reality for teleoperation of mobile robots. Robotica 28(01), 11–22 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Storms, J., Chen, K., Tilbury, D.: Modeling teleoperated robot driving performance as a function of environment difficulty. In: IFAC Conference on Cyber-Physical & Human-Systems, Florianopolis, Brazil, pp. 216–221. Elsevier (2016)

  28. Storms, J., Chen, K., Tilbury, D.: A shared control method for obstacle avoidance with mobile robots and its interaction with communication delay. Int. J. Rob. Res. 36(5-7), 820–839 (2017)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Takayama, L., Marder-Eppstein, E., Harris, H., Beer, J.M.: Assisted driving of a mobile remote presence system: System design and controlled user evaluation. In: IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Shanghai, China, pp. 1883–1889. IEEE (2011)

  30. Vaughan, J., Barany, D.A., Sali, A.W., Jax, S.A., Rosenbaum, D.A.: Extending Fitts’ Law to three-dimensional obstacle-avoidance movements: Support for the posture-based motion planning model. Exp. Brain Res. 207(1-2), 133–138 (2010)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Wang, B., Li, Z., Ding, N.: Speech control of a teleoperated mobile humanoid robot. In: IEEE International Conference on Automation and Logistics (ICAL), Chongqing, China, pp. 339–344 (2011)

  32. Xiong, Y., Li, S., Xie, M.: Predictive display and interaction of telerobots based on augmented reality. Robotica 24(04), 447–453 (2006)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Xu, Y., Yu, C., Li, J., Liu, Y.: Video telephony for end-consumers: measurement study of Google+, iChat, and Skype. In: Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Internet Measurement Conference, Boston, USA, pp. 371–384. ACM (2012)

  34. Zhai, S., Accot, J., Woltjer, R.: Human action laws in electronic virtual worlds: an empirical study of path steering performance in VR. Presence Teleop. Virt. Environ. 13(2), 113–127 (2004)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Dave Daniszewski, Ben Haynes, Paul Muench, Mitch Rohde, and Steve Rohde for helpful discussions. Additionally, we thank Kevin Chen for his assistance developing the robot environment.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109, USA

    Justin Storms & Dawn Tilbury

Authors
  1. Justin Storms
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Dawn Tilbury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Justin Storms.

Additional information

This research was supported by the Automotive Research Center at the University of Michigan, with funding from government contract DoD-DoA W56HZV-14-2-0001 through the US Army Tank Automotive Research, Development, and Engineering Center.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Storms, J., Tilbury, D. A New Difficulty Index for Teleoperated Robots Driving through Obstacles. J Intell Robot Syst 90, 147–160 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-017-0651-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10846-017-0651-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation