ArticleScientific reports2026
Force-velocity coupling limits human adaptation in physical human-robot interaction.
Article in Scientific reports, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In physical human-robot interaction, both humans and robots need to adapt to ensure synergetic behavior. This study investigated how humans respond to robots moving with different velocity profiles. In unconstrained human movements, velocity scales with the trajectory's curvature, i.e., moving fast at linear segments while slowing down at curved segments. Two experiments examined humans tracking a robot that traced an elliptic path with different velocity profiles, while instructed to minimize interaction forces. Results showed involuntary forces were higher when the robot moved with constant velocity or exaggerated the biological velocity-curvature scaling. Specifically, higher angular velocities in the robot were associated with greater tangential and normal forces. Experiment 1 tested whether biomechanical constraints caused these forces by reversing movement direction, but observed differences were small. Experiment 2 explored human adaptation across three practice sessions and found that interaction forces decreased for non-biological profiles only when real-time visual feedback was provided. The force-velocity modulations weakened, indicating that humans learned to predict and compensate for inertial forces. These findings highlight the need to consider human motor limitations and learning processes in physical interaction. The results have practical implications for collaborative and wearable robots where physical contact and coordination between humans and robots are critical.
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.