Abstract
Mobile Robotic Telepresence (MRP) helps people to communicate in natural ways despite being physically located in different parts of the world. User interfaces of such systems are as critical as the design and functionality of the robot itself for creating conditions for natural interaction. This article presents an exploratory study analysing different robot teleoperation interfaces. The goals of this paper are to investigate the possible effect of using augmented reality as the means to drive a robot, to identify key factors of the user interface in order to improve the user experience through a driving interface, and to minimize interface familiarization time for non-experienced users. The study involved 23 participants whose robot driving attempts via different user interfaces were analysed. The results show that a user interface with an augmented reality interface resulted in better driving experience.
References
[1] Jenay M Beer and Leila Takayama. Mobile Remote Presence Systems for Older Adults : Acceptance , Benefits , and Concerns. In Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Human- robot interaction HRI 11, HRI ’11, pages 19–26. ACM, 2011. 10.1145/1957656.1957665Search in Google Scholar
[2] Oliver Bimber and Ramesh Raskar. Spatial Augmented Reality Merging Real and Virtual Worlds, volume 6. A K Peters, Ltd., 2005. 10.1201/b10624Search in Google Scholar
[3] Kristoffer Cavallin and Peter Svensson. Semi-Autonomous, Teleoperated Search and Rescue Robot. PhD thesis, 2009. Search in Google Scholar
[4] John P Chin, Virginia A Diehl, and Kent L Norman. Development of an instrument measuring user satisfaction of the human-computer interface. In Elliot Soloway, Douglas Frye, and Sylvia B Sheppard, editors, Learning, volume 218 of CHI ’88, pages 213–218. ACM New York, NY, USA, ACM, 1988. 10.1145/57167.57203Search in Google Scholar
[5] S. Coradeschi, A. Kristoffersson, A. Loutfi, S. Von Rump, A. Cesta, G. Cortellessa, and J. Gonzalez. Towards a Methodology for Longitudinal Evaluation of Social Robotic Telepresence for Elderly. In Proceedings of the HRI 2011 Workshop on Social Robotic Telepresence, pages 1–7, 2011. 10.1145/1957656.1957660Search in Google Scholar
[6] Anca D Dragan, Siddhartha Siddhartha Srinivasa, and Kenton Kenton Lee. Teleoperation with Intelligent and Customizable Interfaces. Journal of Human-Robot Interaction, 2(2):33–57, June 2013. 10.5898/JHRI.2.2.DraganSearch in Google Scholar
[7] Terrence Fong and C Thorpe. Vehicle teleoperation interfaces. Autonomous robots, pages 9–18, 2001. 10.1023/A:1011295826834Search in Google Scholar
[8] Giraff Technologies AB. Giraff Technologies AB, 2013. Search in Google Scholar
[9] H Iseki. Computer Assisted Neurosurgery. International Journal of Computer Assisted Radiology and Surgery, 1(S1):293–310, May 2006. 10.1007/s11548-006-0023-ySearch in Google Scholar
[10] Andrey Kiselev and Amy Loutfi. Using a Mental Workload Index as a Measure of Usability of a User Interface forSocial Robotic Telepresence. Workshop in Social Robotics Telepresence, 2012. Search in Google Scholar
[11] Annica Kristoffersson, Silvia Coradeschi, KS Eklundh, and Amy Loutfi. Towards measuring quality of interaction in mobile robotic telepresence using sociometric badges. Panadyn Journal of Behavioral Robotics, 2013. 10.2478/pjbr-2013-0005Search in Google Scholar
[12] Annica Kristoffersson, Silvia Coradeschi, and Amy Loutfi. A Review of Mobile Robotic Telepresence. Advances in Human- Computer Interaction, 2013:1–17, 2013. 10.1155/2013/902316Search in Google Scholar
[13] D Labonte, F Michaud, P Boissy, H Corriveau, R Cloutier, and M A Roux. A Pilot Study on Teleoperated Mobile Robots in Home Environments, 2006. 10.1109/IROS.2006.282082Search in Google Scholar
[14] Daniel Labonte, Patrick Boissy, and François Michaud. Comparative analysis of 3-D robot teleoperation interfaces with novice users. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cyber- netics - Part B: Cybernetics, 40(5):1331–42, October 2010. 10.1109/TSMCB.2009.2038357Search in Google Scholar PubMed
[15] FJ Rodríguez Lera. Augmented reality to improve teleoperation of mobile robots. pages 1–6, 2011. Search in Google Scholar
[16] F Michaud, P Boissy, and D Labonte. Telepresence Robot for Home Care Assistance. AAAI Spring Symposium, 2007. Search in Google Scholar
[17] Oracle. Nimbus Look and Feel, 2013. Search in Google Scholar
[18] RA Peters. Robonaut task learning through teleoperation. In ICRA’03, pages 2806–2811, 2003. Search in Google Scholar
[19] Giuseppe Riva, Francesca Morganti, and Marco Villamira. Immersive Virtual Telepresence: virtual reality meets eHealth. Studies in health technology and informatics, 99:255–62, January 2004. Search in Google Scholar
[20] Jussi Suomela and Aarne Halme. Tele-Existence Techniques of Heavy Work Vehicles. pages 29–38, 2001.10.1023/A:1011252027743Search in Google Scholar
This content is open access.
