Supermedia in Internet-Based Telerobotic Operations

Elhajj, Imad H.; Xi, Ning; Fung, Wai-keung; Liu, Yunhui; Li, Wen J.; Kaga, Tomoyuki; Fukuda, Toshio

doi:10.1007/3-540-45508-6_29

Cited by 11 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interacting via teleoperation can lack fidelity if the device does not reproduce the other person's forces perfectly or introduces latencies [26], [27]. Much of the teleoperation research focuses on issues of how to recreate forces and less on the actual interaction between the two remote agents, thus we will not go into detail here.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical Collaboration of Human-Human and Human-Robot Teams

Reed

Peshkin

2008

IEEE Trans. Haptics

199

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract-Human partners working on a target acquisition task perform faster than do individuals on the same task, even though the partners consider each other to be an impediment. We recorded the force profile of each partner during the task, revealing an emergent specialization of roles that could only have been negotiated through a haptic channel. With this understanding of human haptic communication, we attempted a "Haptic Turing Test," replicating human behaviors in a robot partner. Human participants consciously and incorrectly believed their partner was human. However, force profiles did not show specialization of roles in the human partner, nor enhanced dyadic performance, suggesting that haptic interaction holds a greater subconscious subtlety. We further report observations of a nonzero dyadic steady-state force perhaps analogous to cocontraction within the limb of an individual, where it contributes to limb stiffness and disturbance rejection. We present results on disturbance rejection in a dyad, showing lack of an effective dyadic strategy for brief events.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Physical Collaboration of Human-Human and Human-Robot Teams

Reed

Peshkin

2008

IEEE Trans. Haptics

199

163

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…System instability and desynchronization are the result of delays and losses that may occur [4]. The communication network is often cited as the source of delays and loss (thus poor system performance), however it is no longer the case with high speed optical networks.…”

Section: Teleoperation and Remote Instrumentationmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…These performance issues are evident in teleoperation systems that use IP-based networks since network service is only best-effort [4], [5], [6]. The network is unable to provide guarantees of data loss, delay, or bandwidth availability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A Network Layer for Teleoperations in High Speed Environments

LaMarche

Hopkins

Hughes

et al. 2007

2007 High-Speed Networks Workshop

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Teleoperation systems allow an operator to control a device at a remote location via a network. System stability is highly dependent on data loss and delay since command messages and the associated device feedback must remain synchronized. Several network protocols are available for teleoperation; however, none is exactly suitable for transmitting the variety of information (e.g. commands, video, and force feedback) needed by advance teleoperation systems. Furthermore, maintaining synchronization is more problematic in a high speed environment since end systems are the primary source of loss and delay. This paper introduces a new network layer designed to control remote devices in a high speed environment. Unlike previous teleoperation approaches, the proposed layer separates control and feedback into separate channels. As a result, multiple feedback channels are possible (e.g. video and force) where each channel can use the transport protocol best suited for its data (e.g. RTP for video). These channels are managed by the new layer ensuring flow control is provided between the operator and the remote device; therefore, different remote control approaches (event and predicted based) are supported. Furthermore, the proposed layer is lightweight and requires no changes to the networking infrastructure since it is only implemented at the end systems (operator and remote device). Experimental results showing the control of a microscope over an 10 Gbps network will demonstrate the teleoperation layer can easily manage communications in a high speed environment.

show abstract

“…Important issues concerning communication channels, random propagation delays, bandwidth limitations, fault-tolerance, synchronization, tele-presence, and the stability of the robotic systems involving human operators have all been taken into account in different works across the literature (Brady & Tarn, 1998); (Elhajj et al, 2001). Most of them consider Internet as the interconnection network between telecontrolled systems and control stations (Goldberg & Siegwart, 2002).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%