ArticleSensors (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Immersive Teleoperation via Collaborative Device-Agnostic Interfaces for Smart Haptics: A Study on Operational Efficiency and Cognitive Overflow for Industrial Assistive Applications.
Article in Sensors (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study presents a novel investigation into immersive teleoperation systems using collaborative, device-agnostic interfaces for advancing smart haptics in industrial assistive applications. The research focuses on evaluating the quality of experience (QoE) of users interacting with a teleoperation system comprising a local robotic arm, a robot gripper, and heterogeneous remote tracking and haptic feedback devices. By employing a modular device-agnostic framework, the system supports flexible configurations, including one-user-one-equipment (1U-1E), one-user-multiple-equipment (1U-ME), and multiple-users-multiple-equipment (MU-ME) scenarios. The experimental set-up involves participants manipulating predefined objects and placing them into designated baskets by following specified 3D trajectories. Performance is measured using objective QoE metrics, including temporal efficiency (time required to complete the task) and spatial accuracy (trajectory similarity to the predefined path). In addition, subjective QoE metrics are assessed through detailed surveys, capturing user perceptions of presence, engagement, control, sensory integration, and cognitive load. To ensure flexibility and scalability, the system integrates various haptic configurations, including (1) a Touch kinaesthetic device for precision tracking and grounded haptic feedback, (2) a DualSense tactile joystick as both a tracker and mobile haptic device, (3) a bHaptics DK2 vibrotactile glove with a camera tracker, and (4) a SenseGlove Nova force-feedback glove with VIVE trackers. The modular approach enables comparative analysis of how different device configurations influence user performance and experience. The results indicate that the objective QoE metrics varied significantly across device configurations, with the Touch and SenseGlove Nova set-ups providing the highest trajectory similarity and temporal efficiency. Subjective assessments revealed a strong correlation between presence and sensory integration, with users reporting higher engagement and control in scenarios utilizing force feedback mechanisms. Cognitive load varied across the set-ups, with more complex configurations (e.g., 1U-ME) requiring longer adaptation periods. This study contributes to the field by demonstrating the feasibility of a device-agnostic teleoperation framework for immersive industrial applications. It underscores the critical interplay between objective task performance and subjective user experience, providing actionable insights into the design of next-generation teleoperation systems.
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.