No abstract

No abstract

An autonomous unmanned underwater vehicle is a type of marine self-propelled robot that executes some specific mission and returns to base on completion of the task. In order to successfully execute the requested operations, the vehicle must be guided by an effective navigation algorithm that enables it to avoid obstacles and follow the best path. Architectures and principles for intelligent dynamic systems are being developed, not only in the underwater arena but also in related areas where the work does not fully justify the name. The problem of increasing the capacity of systems management is highly relevant based on the development of new methods for dynamic analysis, pattern recognition, artificial intelligence, and adaptation. Among the large variety of navigation methods that presently exist, the dynamic window approach is worth noting. It was originally presented by Fox et al. and has been implemented in indoor office robots. In this paper, the dynamic window approach is applied to the marine world by developing and extending it to manipulate vehicles in 3D marine environments. This algorithm is provided to enable efficient avoidance of obstacles and attainment of targets. Experiments conducted using the algorithm in MATLAB indicate that it is an effective obstacle avoidance approach for marine vehicles.

This study investigates how different motion planning algorithms, implemented on a collaborative robot (cobot), are perceived by 48 human subjects. The four implemented algorithms ensure human safety based on the concept of speed and separation monitoring, but differ based on the following characteristics: (a) the cobot motion happens either along a fixed path or with a trajectory that is continuously planned in real time via nonlinear model predictive control, to increase cobot productivity; (b) the cobot speed is further reduced—or not—in real time based on heart rate measurements, to increase perceived safety. We conclude that (1) using a fixed path—compared to real-time motion planning—may reduce productivity and, at least when heart rate measurements are not used to modify the cobot speed, increases perceived safety; (2) reducing cobot speed based on heart rate measurements reduces productivity but does not improve perceived safety; (3) perceived safety is positively affected by habituation during the experiment, and unaffected by previous experience.

No abstract