Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33327500›Full record

ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2020

Performance Analysis of a Head and Eye Motion-Based Control Interface for Assistive Robots.

Sarah Stalljann, Lukas Wöhle, Jeroen Schäfer, Marion Gebhard

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Sarah StalljannGroup of Sensors and Actuators, Department of Electrical Engineering and Applied Physics, Westphalian University of Applied Sciences, 45877 Gelsenkirchen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0001-7559-4307
Lukas WöhleGroup of Sensors and Actuators, Department of Electrical Engineering and Applied Physics, Westphalian University of Applied Sciences, 45877 Gelsenkirchen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-6910-2684
Jeroen SchäferGroup of Sensors and Actuators, Department of Electrical Engineering and Applied Physics, Westphalian University of Applied Sciences, 45877 Gelsenkirchen, Germany.
Marion GebhardGroup of Sensors and Actuators, Department of Electrical Engineering and Applied Physics, Westphalian University of Applied Sciences, 45877 Gelsenkirchen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-7245-0401

Funding

Federal Ministry of Education and Research of Germany 16SV7866K
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Assistive robots support people with limited mobility in their everyday life activities and work. However, most of the assistive systems and technologies for supporting eating and drinking require a residual mobility in arms or hands. For people without residual mobility, different hands-free controls have been developed. For hands-free control, the combination of different modalities can lead to great advantages and improved control. The novelty of this work is a new concept to control a robot using a combination of head and eye motions. The control unit is a mobile, compact and low-cost multimodal sensor system. A Magnetic Angular Rate Gravity (MARG)-sensor is used to detect head motion and an eye tracker enables the system to capture the user's gaze. To analyze the performance of the two modalities, an experimental evaluation with ten able-bodied subjects and one subject with tetraplegia was performed. To assess discrete control (event-based control), a button activation task was performed. To assess two-dimensional continuous cursor control, a Fitts's Law task was performed. The usability study was related to a use-case scenario with a collaborative robot assisting a drinking action. The results of the able-bodied subjects show no significant difference between eye motions and head motions for the activation time of the buttons and the throughput, while, using the eye tracker in the Fitts's Law task, the error rate was significantly higher. The subject with tetraplegia showed slightly better performance for button activation when using the eye tracker. In the use-case, all subjects were able to use the control unit successfully to support the drinking action. Due to the limited head motion of the subject with tetraplegia, button activation with the eye tracker was slightly faster than with the MARG-sensor. A further study with more subjects with tetraplegia is planned, in order to verify these results.

Indexed as

Eye MovementsRoboticsHandHeadHumansMotionQuadriplegiaassistive technologycursor controleye trackerFitts’ LawMARGmotion sensorsrobot controltetraplegia

Identifiers

PMID33327500
PMCPMC7764952

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.