Performance Analysis of a Head and Eye Motion-Based Control Interface for Assistive Robots

• Published in: Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) Vol. 20; no. 24; p. 7162
• Main Authors: Stalljann, Sarah, Wöhle, Lukas, Schäfer, Jeroen, Gebhard, Marion
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Switzerland MDPI AG 14.12.2020; MDPI
• Subjects: Activities of daily living; Adaptive technology; assistive technology; Electromyography; Eye Movements; eye tracker; Fitts’ Law; Hand; Handicapped assistance devices; Head; Humans; Interfaces; Library cataloging; MARG; Microelectromechanical systems; Motion; Motion control; motion sensors; Quadriplegia; Questionnaires; Robotics; Robots; Sensors; tetraplegia; Usability; Workloads; Fitts’ Law; robot control; motion sensors; tetraplegia; assistive technology; MARG; cursor control; eye tracker
• DOI: 10.3390/s20247162
• ISSN: 1424-8220

Assistive robots support people with limited mobility in their everyday life activities and work. However, most of the assistive systems and technologies for supporting eating and drinking require a residual mobility in arms or hands. For people without residual mobility, different hands-free controls have been developed. For hands-free control, the combination of different modalities can lead to great advantages and improved control. The novelty of this work is a new concept to control a robot using a combination of head and eye motions. The control unit is a mobile, compact and low-cost multimodal sensor system. A Magnetic Angular Rate Gravity (MARG)-sensor is used to detect head motion and an eye tracker enables the system to capture the user’s gaze. To analyze the performance of the two modalities, an experimental evaluation with ten able-bodied subjects and one subject with tetraplegia was performed. To assess discrete control (event-based control), a button activation task was performed. To assess two-dimensional continuous cursor control, a Fitts’s Law task was performed. The usability study was related to a use-case scenario with a collaborative robot assisting a drinking action. The results of the able-bodied subjects show no significant difference between eye motions and head motions for the activation time of the buttons and the throughput, while, using the eye tracker in the Fitts’s Law task, the error rate was significantly higher. The subject with tetraplegia showed slightly better performance for button activation when using the eye tracker. In the use-case, all subjects were able to use the control unit successfully to support the drinking action. Due to the limited head motion of the subject with tetraplegia, button activation with the eye tracker was slightly faster than with the MARG-sensor. A further study with more subjects with tetraplegia is planned, in order to verify these results.