Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2018 Nov 30:12:83.
doi: 10.3389/fnbot.2018.00083. eCollection 2018.

System Transparency in Shared Autonomy: A Mini Review

Affiliations
Review

System Transparency in Shared Autonomy: A Mini Review

Victoria Alonso et al. Front Neurorobot. .

Abstract

What does transparency mean in a shared autonomy framework? Different ways of understanding system transparency in human-robot interaction can be found in the state of the art. In one of the most common interpretations of the term, transparency is the observability and predictability of the system behavior, the understanding of what the system is doing, why, and what it will do next. Since the main methods to improve this kind of transparency are based on interface design and training, transparency is usually considered a property of such interfaces, while natural language explanations are a popular way to achieve transparent interfaces. Mechanical transparency is the robot capacity to follow human movements without human-perceptible resistive forces. Transparency improves system performance, helping reduce human errors, and builds trust in the system. One of the principles of user-centered design is to keep the user aware of the state of the system: a transparent design is a user-centered design. This article presents a review of the definitions and methods to improve transparency for applications with different interaction requirements and autonomy degrees, in order to clarify the role of transparency in shared autonomy, as well as to identify research gaps and potential future developments.

Keywords: communication; human-robot interaction; interface; observability; predictability; shared autonomy; transparency; user-centered design.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Anaya F., Thangavel P., Yu H. (2018). Hybrid FES–robotic gait rehabilitation technologies: a review on mechanical design, actuation, and control strategies. Int. J. Intell. Robot. Appl. 2, 1–28. 10.1007/s41315-017-0042-6 - DOI
    1. Aracil R., Azorin J., Ferre M., Peña C. (2013). Bilateral control by state convergence based on transparency for systems with time delay. Robot. Auton. Syst. 61, 86–94. 10.1016/j.robot.2012.11.006 - DOI
    1. Arrichiello F., Lillo P. D., Vito D. D., Antonelli G., Chiaverini S. (2017). “Assistive robot operated via p300-based brain computer interface,” in 2017 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (Singapore: ), 6032–6037. 10.1109/ICRA.2017.7989714 - DOI
    1. Awad L. N., Bae J., O'Donnell K., De Rossi S. M. M., Hendron K., Sloot L. H., et al. . (2017). A soft robotic exosuit improves walking in patients after stroke. Sci. Transl. Med. 9:eaai9084. 10.1126/scitranslmed.aai9084 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bai H., Cai S., Ye N., Hsu D., Lee W. S. (2015). “Intention-aware online pomdp planning for autonomous driving in a crowd,” in 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) (Seattle, WA: ), 454–460. 10.1109/ICRA.2015.7139219 - DOI

LinkOut - more resources