Assistance or challenge? Filling a gap in user-cooperative control
Abstract
Nowadays, “user-cooperative” control strategies are commonly used in robot-assisted motor (re-)learning. User-cooperative strategies enable compliant haptic interactions between robot and user: the robot only intervenes as needed, instead of forcing the user to follow a fixed predefined movement. However, the effectiveness of user-cooperative control is contro-versially discussed. Recent studies indicate that the effectiveness of user-cooperative control strategies will be enhanced when every user is individually provided with an optimal amount of assistance or challenge. In conventional motor (re-)learning, such an optimal amount of assistance or challenge is successfully applied by physiotherapists and trainers.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
A recently presented controller can continuously shift from haptic guidance by path control to error augmentation through continuous scaling of a torque field.
“The controller can modify its behavior continuously from haptic guidance by path control to error augmentation through continuous scaling of a torque field (Rauter et al., 2011).”
From Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review (2013) · cites this paper as Rauter et al., 2011
The impact of that continuously adapting controller on motor learning has not yet been evaluated.
“So far, a proof-ofconcept has been provided; the impact of this controller on motor learning has yet to be evaluated.”
From Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review (2013) · cites this paper as Rauter et al., 2011
Cites
Guadagnoli, M. A., & Lee, T. D. (2004) · Journal of Motor Behavior · doi:10.3200/jmbr.36.2.212-224 · Cited by 1,534 · cited 1× · see citing works
“However, as stated in the Challenge Point Theory [13], novices or less skilled subjects may not profit from error augmentation, since they do not know the desired movement or cannot perform the movement in a perturbing environment.”
BackgroundWinstein, C. J., Pohl, P. S., & Lewthwaite, R. (1994) · Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport · doi:10.1080/02701367.1994.10607635 · Cited by 264 · see citing works
Emken, J. L., Benitez, R., & Reinkensmeyer, D. J. (2007) · Journal of NeuroEngineering and Rehabilitation · doi:10.1186/1743-0003-4-8 · Cited by 199 · see citing works
Haptic Guidance Can Enhance Motor Learning of a Steering Task
Crespo, L. M., & Reinkensmeyer, D. J. (2008) · Journal of Motor Behavior · doi:10.3200/jmbr.40.6.545-557 · Cited by 166 · cited 1× · see citing works
“in a wheelchair driving task where haptic guidance has been adapted as needed [17].”
BackgroundLee, J., & Choi, S. (2010) · 2010 IEEE Haptics Symposium · doi:10.1109/haptic.2010.5444635 · Cited by 118 · see citing works
Presentation- and test-trial effects on acquisition and retention of distance and location.
Hagman, J. D. (1983) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition · doi:10.1037/0278-7393.9.2.334 · Cited by 50 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Augmented visual, auditory, haptic, and multimodal feedback in motor learning: A review
Sigrist, R., Rauter, G., Riener, R., & Wolf, P. (2013) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-012-0333-8 · Cited by 1,416 · see citing works
Self-citation
- Authors
- Rauter, G., Sigrist, R., Marchal-Crespo, L., Vallery, H., Riener, R., & Wolf, P.
- Affiliations
- University of Zurich (CH)
- Venue
- 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems
- Publisher
- IEEE
- Published
- 2011-09
- Pages
- 3068-3073
- ISSN
- 2153-0858 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2167449101
- Cited by
- 24
- References
- 6
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2022: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 6.76
- Type
- conference paper
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (publishedVersion)
- Bern Open Repository and Information System (University of Bern) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Prosthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Motor Control and Adaptation
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Rehabilitation › Stroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
- Keywords
- motor rehabilitation, individualized support, robot-assisted therapy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
