Cited by 26Usability and User Interface DesignSpeech and dialogue systemsHuman-Automation Interaction and Safety

Evaluating the Efficiency of Voice Control as Human Machine Interface in Production

Norda, Marvin, Engel, Christoph, Rennies, Jan, Appell, Jens-E., Lange, Sven Carsten, Hahn, Axel·2024·IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering

Abstract

Cars, mobile phones, and smart home devices already provide automatic speech recognition (ASR) by default. However, human machine interfaces (HMI) in industrial settings, as opposed to consumer settings, operate under different conditions and thus, present different design challenges. Voice control, arguably the most natural form of communication, has the potential to shorten complex command sequences and menu structures in order to directly execute a final command. Therefore, this contribution explored how differing HMI scenarios could possibly be optimized, by either replacing or complementing existing touch control interactions with voice control. Typical commands from CNC milling machines and industrial robots were categorized by their complexity, quantified by menu level and the necessary number of interactions. The collected interaction data showed that voice control can already provide a time efficiency advantage at either one additional menu level or three touchscreen interactions. For complex commands, such as those needing five menu levels and seven interactions on the touchscreen, the time efficiency advantage of voice control can reach up to 67 %. Furthermore, the study shows the possibility of reducing machine operator training times when using voice control by significantly lower interaction times for the first repetition of the participantsNote to Practitioners—Several publications investigate the ergonomics, usability, and cognitive load of classic mouse and keyboard control, button control, touch control, gesture control, gaze control, or voice control in specific interaction scenarios. All publications state that these factors need to be considered for the development of modern human machine interfaces (HMI). Due by the complexity of these factors, it is difficult to develop general guidelines to build efficient HMIs independent from the machine or process. A lack of efficiency guidelines potentially hampers the development of new HMIs, currently necessary to address the new challenges in the digital production hall like increasingly complex machines, processes that become more individual as well as multiple machine operation. In order to inform HMI development, voice and touch control alternatives were empirically measured. Based on the collected data complexity time equivalents for each menu level and number of interactions were calculated. These time equivalents provide the opportunity for machine and programmable logic controller (PLC) manufacturers to evaluate their production processes and the related interaction processes regarding the potential efficiency benefits of voice control as a complement or substitute for the conventional HMI system. Using this model, the efficiency advantage of voice control can be estimated without implementing and testing a voice control on a real production machine. Thus, the potential benefit of implementing voice control can be assessed directly, avoiding expensive test runs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tase.2023.3302951

Cites

34 of 34 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 35 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Norda, M., Engel, C., Rennies, J., Appell, J.-E., Lange, S. C., & Hahn, A.
Affiliations
  • Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Media Technology (DE)
  • University of Applied Sciences Emden Leer (DE)
  • Carl von Ossietzky Universität Oldenburg (DE)
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering
Published
2024-07
Volume
21
Issue
3
Pages
4817-4828
ISSN
  • 1545-5955 (ISSN-L)
  • 1558-3783
OpenAlex
W4386175710
Cited by
26
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 6
FWCI
4.50
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering (publishedVersion)
  • elib (German Aerospace Center) (acceptedVersion)
  • Fraunhofer-Publica (Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • Fraunhofer Institute for Digital Media Technology, Oldenburg Branch Hearing, Speech, and Audio Technology (HSA) through the Program ≫Vorab≪
  • Lower Saxony Ministry of Science and Culture
  • Volkswagen Foundation for its further development (76251-99-2/19 (ZN3812))
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Human-Computer Interaction › Usability and User Interface Design
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Speech and dialogue systems
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Human-Automation Interaction and Safety
Keywords
voice control, human-machine interaction, industrial automation, CNC milling machine, industrial robots, touch control, interaction time

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