↓ Skip to main content

Learning Semantics of Gestural Instructions for Human-Robot Collaboration

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Neurorobotics, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Readers on

mendeley
55 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Learning Semantics of Gestural Instructions for Human-Robot Collaboration
Published in
Frontiers in Neurorobotics, March 2018
DOI 10.3389/fnbot.2018.00007
Pubmed ID
Authors

Dadhichi Shukla, Özgür Erkent, Justus Piater

Abstract

Designed to work safely alongside humans, collaborative robots need to be capable partners in human-robot teams. Besides having key capabilities like detecting gestures, recognizing objects, grasping them, and handing them over, these robots need to seamlessly adapt their behavior for efficient human-robot collaboration. In this context we present the fast, supervised Proactive Incremental Learning (PIL) framework for learning associations between human hand gestures and the intended robotic manipulation actions. With the proactive aspect, the robot is competent to predict the human's intent and perform an action without waiting for an instruction. The incremental aspect enables the robot to learn associations on the fly while performing a task. It is a probabilistic, statistically-driven approach. As a proof of concept, we focus on a table assembly task where the robot assists its human partner. We investigate how the accuracy of gesture detection affects the number of interactions required to complete the task. We also conducted a human-robot interaction study with non-roboticist users comparing a proactive with a reactive robot that waits for instructions.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 55 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 55 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 16%
Researcher 8 15%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 13%
Student > Master 5 9%
Unspecified 2 4%
Other 5 9%
Unknown 19 35%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Engineering 11 20%
Psychology 5 9%
Computer Science 5 9%
Unspecified 2 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 2%
Other 6 11%
Unknown 25 45%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 July 2019.
All research outputs
#15,445,744
of 23,028,364 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#445
of 880 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#211,337
of 332,288 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Neurorobotics
#9
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,028,364 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 880 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.1. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 332,288 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 36th percentile – i.e., 36% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 50% of its contemporaries.