基于头部运动的运动传感器控制模式评估

Nina Rudigkeit, Marion Gebhard, A. Gräser
{"title":"基于头部运动的运动传感器控制模式评估","authors":"Nina Rudigkeit, Marion Gebhard, A. Gräser","doi":"10.1109/MeMeA.2015.7145187","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Head-controlled Human-Machine Interfaces play an important role in restoration of the autonomy of severely disabled people, like tetraplegics. In the literature, different control modes to map head movement onto a single degree of freedom of an object to be controlled have been presented. However, the control modes have not been compared with each other under different conditions. With the work presented in this paper, we close this gap by evaluating two of the most promising control modes, namely position mode and velocity mode. These modes were tested under different conditions in order to highlight their advantages and disadvantages and to make suggestions which mode should be used for a particular application. Head movements were measured using a smart 9-axis motion sensor system. The mouse cursor control was considered as an example application for which control modes were compared subjectively as well as objectively. The objective comparison was carried out using a two-dimensional Fitts' Law Test at two different distances to the computer screen. Then, the modes were evaluated subjectively with an evaluation sheet. Position control mode turned out to be significantly faster than the velocity mode. On the other hand, the error rate for position mode increased significantly with the screen distance while velocity mode was insensitive to screen displacements. This was in line with the significantly higher ratings of accurate pointing for velocity mode. Because of this, the velocity mode is the preferred choice for safety-critical applications, such as robot control, while position mode should be used when speed is more important than accuracy, e.g. for cursor control. Therefore, the usefulness of the control modes depends on the application.","PeriodicalId":277757,"journal":{"name":"2015 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA) Proceedings","volume":"185 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"15","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of control modes for head motion-based control with motion sensors\",\"authors\":\"Nina Rudigkeit, Marion Gebhard, A. Gräser\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/MeMeA.2015.7145187\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Head-controlled Human-Machine Interfaces play an important role in restoration of the autonomy of severely disabled people, like tetraplegics. In the literature, different control modes to map head movement onto a single degree of freedom of an object to be controlled have been presented. However, the control modes have not been compared with each other under different conditions. With the work presented in this paper, we close this gap by evaluating two of the most promising control modes, namely position mode and velocity mode. These modes were tested under different conditions in order to highlight their advantages and disadvantages and to make suggestions which mode should be used for a particular application. Head movements were measured using a smart 9-axis motion sensor system. The mouse cursor control was considered as an example application for which control modes were compared subjectively as well as objectively. The objective comparison was carried out using a two-dimensional Fitts' Law Test at two different distances to the computer screen. Then, the modes were evaluated subjectively with an evaluation sheet. Position control mode turned out to be significantly faster than the velocity mode. On the other hand, the error rate for position mode increased significantly with the screen distance while velocity mode was insensitive to screen displacements. This was in line with the significantly higher ratings of accurate pointing for velocity mode. Because of this, the velocity mode is the preferred choice for safety-critical applications, such as robot control, while position mode should be used when speed is more important than accuracy, e.g. for cursor control. Therefore, the usefulness of the control modes depends on the application.\",\"PeriodicalId\":277757,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"2015 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA) Proceedings\",\"volume\":\"185 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"15\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"2015 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA) Proceedings\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1109/MeMeA.2015.7145187\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"2015 IEEE International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA) Proceedings","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1109/MeMeA.2015.7145187","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 15

摘要

头控人机界面在恢复四肢瘫痪等严重残疾人的自主性方面发挥着重要作用。在文献中,已经提出了将头部运动映射到待控制对象的单个自由度上的不同控制模式。然而,在不同的条件下,控制方式还没有相互比较。通过本文的工作,我们通过评估两种最有前途的控制模式,即位置模式和速度模式来缩小这一差距。在不同的条件下对这些模式进行了测试,以突出其优点和缺点,并对特定应用应使用哪种模式提出建议。使用智能9轴运动传感器系统测量头部运动。以鼠标光标控制为例,对控制方式进行了主观上和客观上的比较。使用二维菲茨定律测试在两个不同距离的计算机屏幕上进行客观比较。然后,用评价表对模型进行主观评价。结果表明,位置控制模式比速度控制模式要快得多。另一方面,位置模式的错误率随着屏幕距离的增加而显著增加,而速度模式对屏幕位移不敏感。这与速度模式中精确指向的更高评级是一致的。正因为如此,速度模式是安全关键应用的首选,比如机器人控制,而位置模式应该在速度比精度更重要的时候使用,比如光标控制。因此,控制模式的有用性取决于应用程序。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Evaluation of control modes for head motion-based control with motion sensors
Head-controlled Human-Machine Interfaces play an important role in restoration of the autonomy of severely disabled people, like tetraplegics. In the literature, different control modes to map head movement onto a single degree of freedom of an object to be controlled have been presented. However, the control modes have not been compared with each other under different conditions. With the work presented in this paper, we close this gap by evaluating two of the most promising control modes, namely position mode and velocity mode. These modes were tested under different conditions in order to highlight their advantages and disadvantages and to make suggestions which mode should be used for a particular application. Head movements were measured using a smart 9-axis motion sensor system. The mouse cursor control was considered as an example application for which control modes were compared subjectively as well as objectively. The objective comparison was carried out using a two-dimensional Fitts' Law Test at two different distances to the computer screen. Then, the modes were evaluated subjectively with an evaluation sheet. Position control mode turned out to be significantly faster than the velocity mode. On the other hand, the error rate for position mode increased significantly with the screen distance while velocity mode was insensitive to screen displacements. This was in line with the significantly higher ratings of accurate pointing for velocity mode. Because of this, the velocity mode is the preferred choice for safety-critical applications, such as robot control, while position mode should be used when speed is more important than accuracy, e.g. for cursor control. Therefore, the usefulness of the control modes depends on the application.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Needle detection by electro-localization for a needle EMG exam robotic simulator Evaluation of control modes for head motion-based control with motion sensors A novel automatically initialized level set approach based on region correlation for lumbar vertebrae CT image segmentation Smart environments using near-field communication and HTML5 New FEM 3D model for arm-cuff interface simulation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1