ArticleFrontiers in neurorobotics2023
Detection of tactile-based error-related potentials (ErrPs) in human-robot interaction.
Article in Frontiers in neurorobotics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Characterization of error-related potentials during the command of a lower-limb exoskeleton based on deep learning.Journal of neuroengineering and rehabilitation · 2025Article
- EEG and EMG dataset for the detection of errors introduced by an active orthosis device.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Robot learning based on implicitly extracted error detections (e.g., EEG-based error detections) has been well-investigated in human-robot interaction (HRI). In particular, the use of error-related potential (ErrP) evoked when recognizing errors is advantageous for robot learning when evaluation criteria cannot be explicitly defined, e.g., due to the complex behavior of robots. In most studies, erroneous behavior of robots were recognized visually. In some studies, visuo-tactile stimuli were used to evoke ErrPs or a tactile cue was used to indicate upcoming errors. To our knowledge, there are no studies in which ErrPs are evoked when recognizing errors only via the tactile channel. Hence, we investigated ErrPs evoked by tactile recognition of errors during HRI. In our scenario, subjects recognized errors caused by incorrect behavior of an orthosis during the execution of arm movements tactilely. EEG data from eight subjects was recorded. Subjects were asked to give a motor response to ensure error detection. Latency between the occurrence of errors and the response to errors was expected to be short. We assumed that the motor related brain activity is timely correlated with the ErrP and might be used from the classifier. To better interpret and test our results, we therefore tested ErrP detections in two additional scenarios, i.e., without motor response and with delayed motor response. In addition, we transferred three scenarios (motor response, no motor response, delayed motor response). Response times to error was short. However, high ErrP-classification performance was found for all subjects in case of motor response and no motor response condition. Further, ErrP classification performance was reduced for the transfer between motor response and delayed motor response, but not for the transfer between motor response and no motor response. We have shown that tactilely induced errors can be detected with high accuracy from brain activity. Our preliminary results suggest that also in tactile ErrPs the brain response is clear enough such that motor response is not relevant for classification. However, in future work, we will more systematically investigate tactile-based ErrP classification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.