analiza aiqbench
This study provides practical guidelines for selecting haptic guidance models in teleoperation, demonstrating that no single approach universally outperforms others across varying environments. Spring-damper models excel in cluttered settings, while potential fields suit free spaces despite obstacle risks, with guiding tubes offering a balanced compromise. The authors also introduce novel objective metrics that correlate guiding force magnitude with operator comfort and trust, aiding real-time system evaluation.
Selecting haptic guidance models in teleoperation: guidelines from a comparative user study
arXiv:2606.04157v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Haptic guidance in teleoperation enhances operator performance through force feedback. This paper presents guidelines to select the most appropriate model considering the task, the environment and the operator. We define a unified formulation expressing most common models (spring-damper, potential field, and guiding tube) as variations of a stiffness-damping system with model-specific guiding functions. We conducted a user study comparing the three classical models across six scenarios with varying environmental conditions in a vertical farming task. Results show no universally superior model: spring-damper excels in cluttered environments, potential field in free spaces (but it shows risks near obstacles), and guiding tube offers a balanced compromise. We propose novel objective metrics to evaluate the interaction, and show that guiding force magnitude correlates with comfort and trust scores. These findings provide practical model selection guidelines through environmental characteristics and real-time evaluation metrics.
Abstract:Haptic guidance in teleoperation enhances operator performance through force feedback. This paper presents guidelines to select the most appropriate model considering the task, the environment and the operator. We define a unified formulation expressing most common models (spring-damper, potential field, and guiding tube) as variations of a stiffness-damping system with model-specific guiding functions. We conducted a user study comparing the three classical models across six scenarios with varying environmental conditions in a vertical farming task. Results show no universally superior model: spring-damper excels in cluttered environments, potential field in free spaces (but it shows risks near obstacles), and guiding tube offers a balanced compromise. We propose novel objective metrics to evaluate the interaction, and show that guiding force magnitude correlates with comfort and trust scores. These findings provide practical model selection guidelines through environmental characteristics and real-time evaluation metrics.
Robotics (cs.RO)
arXiv:2606.04157 [cs.RO]
(or arXiv:2606.04157v1 [cs.RO] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.04157 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Text integral sub licența deschisă a publicației · 232 cuvinte
Subiecte conexe

How Much Memory Does Your Agent Actually Need?
Hugging Face · 18 aug. 2026
A Red Line and Oversight Framework for Government AI Contracts
AI Alignment Forum · 18 iul. 2026
The Continual Constitutional Convention: How language models revise the documents that govern them
AI Alignment Forum · 13 oct. 2026

Automated Reasoning policy refinement in Amazon Bedrock
AWS · 3 aug. 2026