The DOI matches its Crossref record; 108 of the 109 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 51 of the 121 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities
Open accessAbstract
This review is dedicated to the advanced applications of robotic technologies in the industrial field. Robotic solutions in areas with non-intensive applications are presented, and their implementations are analysed. We also provide an overview of survey publications and technical reports, classified by application criteria, and the development of the structure of existing solutions, and identify recent research gaps. The analysis results reveal the background to the existing obstacles and problems. These issues relate to the areas of psychology, human nature, special artificial intelligence (AI) implementation, and the robot-oriented object design paradigm. Analysis of robot applications shows that the existing emerging applications in robotics face technical and psychological obstacles. The results of this review revealed four directions of required advancement in robotics: development of intelligent companions; improved implementation of AI-based solutions; robot-oriented design of objects; and psychological solutions for robot–human collaboration.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
This review surveys 2018–2021 industrial robotics applications in fields with weak robotisation traditions—medical, food, agriculture, and civil engineering—plus human-machine interaction, object recognition, path planning, and optimisation. It identifies four needed directions: intelligent companion equipment, AI-based solutions, robot-oriented object design, and psychological solutions for robot-human collaboration.
Key findings
- The review selected 115 publications from 79,500 Google Scholar results; it reports 373,000 industrial robots sold globally in 2019 and 2.7 million operating in factories in 2020, while ScienceDirect papers using “Industrial robot” rose from more than 4,500 in 2019 to 5,300 in 2020.
- Reported application results include a >79% productivity increase in adaptive assembly, >90% object-grasping success after <5 min training, ~99% colour/height sorting efficiency, 49.1% mean average precision for solid waste detection, and nearly 100% online recognition at 2028 picks/h for construction and demolition waste sorting.
- Medical and path-planning examples include an open-source reinforcement learning environment for da Vinci robots, ~60% average agreement with human experts for personalised affect/engagement perception, eye-tracking plus vision localisation with 5.5 cm average error versus 72 cm for gaze-only, and HMM + Bayesian optimisation assembly success of 93% versus 19% for HMM alone.
- The paper concludes four advancement directions: development of intelligent companion equipment; improved AI-based signal processing and decision making; redesign of general objects for robotic applications; and psychological solutions for robot-human collaboration and workplace acceptance.
Methods
- Literature review using keywords such as industrial robots, collaborative robots, and robotics over a four-year period, focused mainly on 2018–2021 applications in medical, food, agricultural, and civil engineering fields, plus human-machine interaction, object recognition, path planning, and optimisation.
- Google Scholar returned 79,500 results, from which 115 publications were selected according to application area, novelty and significance of achievements, reliability, and feasibility of results.
- The analysis classifies recent achievements by implementation area and takes a multidisciplinary perspective, including computer vision and machine learning for robotic applications.
Limitations
- Stated in the paper: surgical robotics machine learning faces a lack of high-quality medical/surgical data, reliable metrics, and structured skill transfer; deep learning is limited by large training-data needs and long training times; AR is limited by insufficient accuracy, occlusion, and limited wearable field of view; construction adoption is limited by economic, technical/work-culture, and weak-business-case factors including untrained workforce, unproven effectiveness, immature technology, and aversion to change.
- Stated in the paper: the review focused on a relatively short four-year period and selected 115 publications from 79,500 results, so coverage is selective; the data are not publicly available due to the project consortium agreement.
- Evident from the text: as a narrative review, it does not report a systematic search protocol, inclusion/exclusion counts, or risk-of-bias assessment, and many performance figures are drawn from cited primary studies rather than independently validated in this paper.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
61 Own interpretation · 45 No full text of the sources · 36 No basis given · 28 Supported · 15 Not checked yet · 14 Partly supported · 3 Couldn’t confirm · 2 Own result · 1 Supported so far · 1 Not supported · 1 Own method · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“This study showed that automated assembly process productivity could be increased by more than 79%.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.1. Classical Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [8] Ivanov, 2020, Hotel managers’ perceptions towards the use of robots: A mixed-methods approach, Inf. Technol. Tour. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (Rationale) discusses the potential for service robots to increase productivity, but it distinguishes service robots from industrial automation. Neither that passage nor the searched passages on assembly and 79% report a productivity increase for assembling industrial refrigerators. Our copy does not address the claimed result. (LLM, conf=0.76)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In mobile robots and automatically guided vehicles (AGV), accurate self-localisation in various environments [80,81] is a basis for further trajectory planning and optimisation.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [80] Fascista, 2021, A Pseudo Maximum likelihood approach to position estimation in dynamic multipath environments, Signal Processing source
- Partly supportedcites [81] Karaagac, A., Haxhibeqiri, J., Ridolfi, M., Joseph, W., Moerman, I., and Hoebeke, J. (2017, January 12–15). Evaluation of accurate indoor localization systems in industrial environments. Proceedings of the 2017 22nd IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA), Limassol, Cyprus. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page unavailable) identifies tracking robots as an industrial application of indoor localization, and the positioning tests evaluate accuracy in static and mobile conditions. The paper does not specifically discuss AGV self-localization; its mobile tests use tagged trolleys. The citation sits after “various environments,” so the later claim about trajectory planning is not treated as attributed to this source. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A robotic arm with six degrees of freedom (DoF) and a camera with computer vision software ensure a sorting efficiency of about 99%.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [38] Shaikat, 2020, Computer Vision Based Industrial Robotic Arm for Sorting Objects by Color and Height, J. Eng. Adv. source
The Abstract describes a robotic sorter with a six-degree-of-freedom arm and a camera using computer vision software. It reports that the proposed system's color-and-height sorting efficiency is around 99%. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Based on the ABB IRB 140 robot and a digital camera, a lowcost shapes identification system was developed and implemented, which is particularly important due to the high variability of welded products [44].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [44] Ciszak, O., Juszkiewicz, J., and Suszyński, M. (2020). Programming of Industrial Robots Using the Recognition of Geometric Signs in Flexible Welding Process. Symmetry, 12. source
The Abstract describes a low-cost shape-identification system for programming an ABB IRB 140 robot to weld contours in 2D, using images from a low-cost digital camera. The Introduction says it is particularly useful for quickly programming welding trajectories in small-lot production, consistent with the citing sentence’s point about variable products. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Results confirmed the influence of the contamination level related to the dataset.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > XVC-1000). A Load Cell (ATI Industrial Automation Mini45-E) to evaluate tool force interactions with work pieces.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [24] Tannous, 2020, Haptic-based touch detection for collaborative robots in welding applications, Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. source
- Could not verifycites [25] Tannous, 2020, Load cell torques and force data collection during tele-operated robotic gas tungsten arc welding in presence of collisions, Data Br. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Data description section (page unavailable) describes raw welding measurements and collision labels, while Value of the data says the dataset could be used to develop algorithms. Neither reports algorithm-performance results or addresses dataset contamination levels (searched: contamination level, outliers, noise, algorithm performance). (LLM, conf=0.74)
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The approach cannot always forecast sudden changes in walking directions, especially when they happened in the later frames.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Density Forecasting in
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [45] Minoura, 2021, Crowd Density Forecasting by Modeling Patch-Based Dynamics, IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (Section 4.6, p. 8) identify a forecasting failure: PDFN can miss a person entering or leaving the frame during future frames. The paper does not identify sudden changes in walking direction as the cause or say that such failures occur especially in later frames. (LLM, conf=0.78)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The food production sector has been relatively slowly robotised compared to other industries [97].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [97] Bader, F., and Rahimifard, S. (2018, January 21–23). Challenges for industrial robot applications in food manufacturing. Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on Computer Science and Intelligent Control, Stockholm, Sweden. source
The Abstract says industrial robots provide flexibility in other manufacturing sectors, while their uptake in food processing has been slow. This supports the comparison in the citing sentence. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The robot is provided with a priori geometric and semantic information about the environment with the help of the BIM system.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Additive manufacturing. An overview
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [111] Follini, C., Magnago, V., Freitag, K., Terzer, M., Marcher, C., Riedl, M., Giusti, A., and Matt, D.T. (2021). Bim-integrated collaborative robotics for application in building construction and maintenance. Robotics, 10. source
The Introduction says the paper’s BIM interface delivers a priori geometric and semantic knowledge of buildings to mobile robotic systems. The Method section confirms that geometric descriptions and semantic metadata from BIM objects were provided to the robotic system before operation. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The main identified challenges for higher adoption of robotics in the construction industry were grouped into four categories: contractor-side economic factors; client-side economic factors; technical and work-culture factors; and weak business case factors.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.7. Civil Engineering Industry
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [108] Oyedele, 2019, Robotics and automated systems in construction: Understanding industry-specific challenges for adoption, J. Build. Eng. source
The Conclusions (section 9) explicitly group the main challenges limiting robotics adoption in construction into the four categories named in the claim. The Factors and Themes section also lists all four categories. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Analysis of robot applications shows that the existing emerging applications in robotics face technical and psychological obstacles.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 84
- The quote only partly states this claim. 6
- Probably not a substantial claim. 94
At least one cited source doesn’t support this claim or points to a different paper, and none confirmed it — see the verdicts below.
In the paper
“Achieved 49.1% mean average precision, processing images in real-time at 35.3 FPS on one single Nvidia GTX1080 GPU.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Coal and gangue sorting robot
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [40] Yu, 2020, A novel detection fusion network for solid waste sorting, Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. source
- Disputedcites [55] Sun, 2019, A novel weakly-supervised approach for RGB-D-based nuclear waste object detection, IEEE Sens. J. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The running-time results (C. Industrial Object Recognition, p. 6) report 2–3 Hz on an NVIDIA TITAN X GPU, or up to 5 Hz with a lighter network and point-cloud down-sampling—not 35.3 FPS on a GTX1080. Table IV (p. 7) reports 80.85% instance-wise and 75.52% pixel-wise average precision, rather than the claimed 49.1% mean average precision. (LLM, conf=0.88)
Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Analysing questionnaires completed by 79 hotel managers, it was concluded that robots have an advantage over human employees due to better data processing capabilities, work speed, protection of personal data, and fewer mistakes.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.1. Classical Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [8] Ivanov, 2020, Hotel managers’ perceptions towards the use of robots: A mixed-methods approach, Inf. Technol. Tour. source
The Methodology (Questionnaire) reports a final sample of 79 hotel managers. The Findings (General perceptions of managers towards service robots) state that managers perceived robots as having advantages over human employees in data processing, speed of work, protection of personal data, and making fewer mistakes. These are reported perceptions, not independently measured performance differences. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The main disadvantages of robots were listed as: lack of capability to provide personalised service; inability to handle complaints; lack of friendliness and politeness; inability to implement a special request that goes beyond their programming; and the lack of understanding of emotions.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.1. Classical Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [8] Ivanov, 2020, Hotel managers’ perceptions towards the use of robots: A mixed-methods approach, Inf. Technol. Tour. source
The Findings section (‘General perceptions of managers towards service robots’) lists managers’ concerns about personalised service, complaint handling, friendliness and politeness. It explicitly identifies inability to fulfil special requests beyond programming and lack of understanding of guests’ emotions as the biggest disadvantages. No page number is provided in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The authors proposed a set of performance metrics and compared four robotic systems for bin picking, and took first place in the Amazon Robotics Challenge 2017.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [36] Fujita, 2020, What are the important technologies for bin picking? Technology analysis of robots in competitions based on a set of performance metrics, Adv. Robot. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and Conclusions say the paper proposes performance metrics and compares four systems from the 2017 Amazon Robotics Challenge. Section 5.2 identifies MIT-Princeton as the winning team, but the paper does not describe a single proposed system that took first place; it proposes metrics for analyzing the systems. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“In the proposed system, colour and height sorting efficiency is around 99%.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Coal and gangue sorting robot
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [38] Shaikat, 2020, Computer Vision Based Industrial Robotic Arm for Sorting Objects by Color and Height, J. Eng. Adv. source
The Abstract states that the proposed computer-vision sorter detects and sorts objects by colour and height at the same time. It also reports colour-and-height sorting efficiency of around 99%. (LLM, conf=0.95)
- Partly supportedcites [53] Fadhil, 2020, Computer Vision-Based System for Classification and Sorting Color Objects, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results and Discussion section says the robotic system sorts objects by colour and geometry, while Camera Calibration says it measures height to calculate dimensions—not that it sorts by height. The Conclusion reports 100% sorting accuracy, rather than around 99% efficiency. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Partly supportedcites [54] Peršak, T., Viltužnik, B., Hernavs, J., and Klancnik, S. (2020). Vision-Based Sorting Systems for Transparent Plastic Granulate. Appl. Sci., 10. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction describes a camera-based sorter that checks granule colour, and the Conclusions report 99.81% purity in the accepted material. But that figure is purity, not colour-and-height sorting efficiency; the paper does not report height sorting, and its nine-class classification accuracy was 90.52%. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one. The quote only partly states this claim.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The analysis shows that AR is mainly used to control and program robotic arms, visualise general tasks or robot information, and visualise the industrial robot workspace.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [21] Manuri, 2020, A systematic review of Augmented Reality interfaces for collaborative industrial robots, Comput. Ind. Eng. source
The paper’s discussion of its review findings (section labelled 735) identifies these three uses: controlling or programming robotic arms, displaying task or robot information, and visualising the robot workspace. It qualifies the distribution: workspace visualisation accounts for only 15% of the collected works. (LLM, conf=0.93)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“During the experiments, the dVRL control policy was effectively learned, and it was found that it could be transferred to a realrobot-with minimal efforts.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.3. Medical Application
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [63] Richter, F., Orosco, R.K., and Yip, M.C. (2019). Open-Sourced Reinforcement Learning Environments for Surgical Robotics. arXiv. source
The Discussion and Conclusion states that dVRL control policies were effectively learned and transferred effectively to a real robot with minimal effort. The Experiments section also says the learned policies were transferred to the dVRK for evaluation. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Results of the analysis indicate that AR systems are faster than traditional approaches; users have greater appreciation for AR systems in terms of likeability and usability; and AR seems to reduce physical workload, whereas the impact on mental workload depends on the interaction interface [16].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [21] Manuri, 2020, A systematic review of Augmented Reality interfaces for collaborative industrial robots, Comput. Ind. Eng. source
The review’s summary of AR strengths (around line 840) states all four points: faster task completion than traditional approaches, greater user appreciation for likeability and usability, reduced physical workload, and mental workload that depends on the interaction interface. The discussion around line 820 adds that mental workload may increase when AR is paired with speech interfaces. (LLM, conf=0.95)
- Could not verifycites [16] Tran, 2021, Experimental Setup for Online Fault Diagnosis of Induction Machines via Promising IoT and Machine Learning: Towards Industry 4.0 Empowerment, IEEE Access sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results and Discussions section evaluates machine-learning classifiers for induction-motor fault and cyberattack detection, not augmented-reality systems. Searches for AR speed, likeability, usability, and physical or mental workload found no passage addressing the cited claim. (LLM, conf=0.76)
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Contrary to typical industrial robots, next-generation robotics uses artificial intelligence (AI) to collaboratively perform tasks and is suitable for uncontrolled/unpredictable environments [15].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [15] Galin, 2019, Automation and robotics in the context of Industry 4.0: The shift to collaborative robots, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction and §2 describe a new generation of robots that work closely with humans and adapt their behaviour when a person enters their workspace. Section 2 also calls artificial intelligence a main element of the Industry 4.0 paradigm. The paper does not say that AI is what enables the collaboration, or establish that these robots are suitable for uncontrolled or unpredictable environments. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The main issues are a lack of high-quality medical and surgical data, a lack of reliable metrics that adequately reflect learning characteristics, and a lack of a structured approach to the effective transfer of surgical skills for automated execution [64].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.3. Medical Application
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [64] Kassahun, 2016, Surgical robotics beyond enhanced dexterity instrumentation: A survey of machine learning techniques and their role in intelligent and autonomous surgical actions, Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. source
The Conclusion (p. 12) lists high-quality data, skill-analysis metrics, and a pipeline for autonomous surgical action among the challenges for machine learning in surgical robotics. The High-quality Medical/Surgical Data section (p. 10), Learning and Defining Skill Analysis Metric section (p. 11), and pipeline discussion (p. 11) elaborate on each of the three issues in the claim. (LLM, conf=0.92)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The sources with a verdict support this claim; the rest weren’t checked yet, have no full text we could read, or their verdicts aren’t rated yet.
In the paper
“In the area of path planning and optimisation, experiments have been conducted for automatic object and 3D position detection [82] quasi-static path optimisation [83], image analysis [84], path smoothing [85], BIM [86], and accurate self-localisation in harsh industrial environments [80,81].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [82] Makomo, 2020, Real Time Application for Automatic Object and 3D Position Detection and Sorting with Robotic Manipulator, Sak. Univ. J. Sci. source
The Abstract describes a robotic pick-and-place system that uses a 3D camera to recognize objects, calculate their positions, and generate a path to grasp them. Citation [82] is attached to automatic object and 3D position detection; the other listed topics have separate citations and are not attributed to this paper. (LLM, conf=0.91)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [83] Hermansson, 2021, Quasi-static path optimization for industrial robots with dress packs, Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. source
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [84] Nguyen, 2021, Hybrid statistical modelling of the frequency response function of industrial robots, Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Although the proposed environment resulted in the simple and primitive actions of reaching and picking, it was useful for suction and debris removal in a real surgical setting.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.3. Medical Application
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [63] Richter, F., Orosco, R.K., and Yip, M.C. (2019). Open-Sourced Reinforcement Learning Environments for Surgical Robotics. arXiv. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Discussion and Conclusion says the environments produce simple reaching and picking primitives and demonstrate their utility through suctioning and debris removal. But the Suction and Debris Removal section describes a simulated abdomen with fake blood, not an actual surgical setting; the paper calls it a “realistic surgical setting.” (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Experiments proved that shared control movements were more accurate, efficient, and less complicated than transfer tasks using BMI alone.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.3. Medical Application
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [66] Downey, 2016, Blending of brain-machine interface and vision-guided autonomous robotics improves neuroprosthetic arm performance during grasping, J. Neuroeng. Rehabil. source
The Background (page unavailable) reports that shared control improved object transfer for two participants with tetraplegia, lowered perceived task difficulty, and produced more stable and efficient trajectories. It also describes the system as combining BMI control with vision-guided assistance, supporting the comparison with BMI control alone. (LLM, conf=0.91)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The patch-based density forecasting networks (PDFNs) directly forecast crowd density maps of future frames instead of trajectories of each moving person in the crowd.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [45] Minoura, 2021, Crowd Density Forecasting by Modeling Patch-Based Dynamics, IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. source
The Figure 2 caption (Related Work, p. 3) says PDFN forecasts patch-based density dynamics and reconstructs future crowd density maps. The Training Setup (p. 4) explicitly says PDFN-D does so without tracking each detected individual, supporting the contrast with forecasting individual trajectories. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“A flexible transoral robot with a teleoperated configuration is proposed to address the surgeons' risks during the face-to-face COVID-19 swab sampling.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > An overview
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [77] Li, 2021, A Flexible Transoral Robot Towards COVID-19 Swab Sampling, Front. Robot. AI source
The Discussion states that the authors propose a flexible transoral robot with a teleoperated configuration to address surgeons’ infection risks during face-to-face COVID-19 swab sampling. The Abstract states the same purpose. The supplied passages do not give page numbers. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Proposed patch-based models, PDFN-S and PDFN-ST, outperformed baselines on all the datasets.PDFN-ST successfully forecasted dynamics of individuals, a small group, and a crowd.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Density Forecasting in
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [45] Minoura, 2021, Crowd Density Forecasting by Modeling Patch-Based Dynamics, IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Results (p. 8) say that PDFN outperformed baselines on all evaluated datasets and forecast the dynamics of individuals, a small group, and a crowd. But the Training Setup (p. 4) identifies the tested variants as PDFN-C and PDFN-D, not PDFN-S and PDFN-ST, so the results are not supported for the named models. (LLM, conf=0.88)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“This robotic system can detect various objects, regardless of their position and orientation, achieving an average success rate of more than 90% in less than 5 min of training time”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [35] Verbelen, 2020, Learning robots to grasp by demonstration, Robot. Auton. Syst. source
Split into 2 atoms — 2 confirmed, 0 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The survey results show that the most promising solutions for such a task are RGB-D sensors and CNN-based algorithms for object recognition, and a combination of suction-based and typical two-finger grippers for grasping different objects”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [36] Fujita, 2020, What are the important technologies for bin picking? Technology analysis of robots in competitions based on a set of performance metrics, Adv. Robot. source
Section 2.4 says RGB-D images were often used for item detection and that CNN-based recognition methods showed good performance. Section 2.2 describes suction plus two-finger grippers as a common configuration adopted by winning teams, supporting the citing sentence’s summary of promising approaches. The passages provide this support in the context of competition systems, rather than as a universal ranking of all bin-picking methods. (LLM, conf=0.87)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The accuracy rate of detecting defective and non-defective objects is successfully improved, increasing the training dataset to up to 400 images of defective and non-defective objects.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Regional Proposal Network (RPN)
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [39] Chen, 2020, Object Sorting using Faster R-CNN, Int. J. Artif. Intell. Appl. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Result Analysis section reports that accuracy rose as the training share of the dataset increased, from 78.83% at 70% training to 85.5% at 90% training. It also says the dataset contained 400 images of defective and intact cubes. The 400 images were the total dataset, however, not the number used for training; the largest reported training share was 90%. (LLM, conf=0.88)
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [56] Albinali, H., and Alzahrani, F.A. (2021, January 30–31). Faster R-CNN for detecting regions in human-annotated micrograph images. Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference of Women in Data Science at Taif University (WiDSTaif), Taif, Saudi Arabia. source
- Partly supportedcites [57] Li, 2021, Analysis of Object Detection Performance Based on Faster R-CNN, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 3.3 (Experimental Results; page not provided) reports that Faster R-CNN had higher detection accuracy than R-CNN and Fast R-CNN on three datasets. It does not report detecting defective versus non-defective symmetric objects or improving accuracy by increasing a training set to 400 images. (LLM, conf=0.86)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
- Partly supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Moreover, due to favourable conditions (advances in AI, sensing technologies, and computer vision), collaborative industrial robots have become significantly smarter, showing the potential of reliable and secure cooperation, and increasing the productivity and efficiency of the involved processes [15].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [15] Galin, 2019, Automation and robotics in the context of Industry 4.0: The shift to collaborative robots, IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“Experimental results showed better performance of the 3-Sigma rule in terms of precision percentage (mean value of 99.9%) and miss rate (mean value of 10%) concerning the Hampel identifier.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > XVC-1000). A Load Cell (ATI Industrial Automation Mini45-E) to evaluate tool force interactions with work pieces.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [24] Tannous, 2020, Haptic-based touch detection for collaborative robots in welding applications, Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. source
- Could not verifycites [25] Tannous, 2020, Load cell torques and force data collection during tele-operated robotic gas tungsten arc welding in presence of collisions, Data Br. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Data description presents a raw dataset from 15 welding tests, and Value of the data says it could be used to develop collision-detection algorithms. Neither section reports a comparison of the 3-Sigma rule with the Hampel identifier. Searches for those methods and for the stated 99.9% precision and 10% miss rate found no matching results in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.76)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The smooth processing strategy improves optimisation efficiency, ensuring minimal stiffness loss.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Point selection method
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [85] Jiao, J., Tian, W., Zhang, L., Li, B., Hu, J., Li, Y., Li, D., and Zhang, J. (2020). Variable stiffness identification and configuration optimization of industrial robots for machining tasks. Res. Sq. source
Section 5.2 states that smooth processing increased configuration-optimization efficiency and that stiffness loss after smoothing was less than 0.409% in the reported comparison. This supports the claim’s qualitative description of improved efficiency with minimal stiffness loss. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The FIRM presented in this paper outlined the ability to classify industrial robot capabilities and match them to specific characteristics of foodstuffs and requirements for their processing based on four steps that navigate eight tasks.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [102] Bader, 2020, A methodology for the selection of industrial robots in food handling, Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. source
The Conclusions section states this claim directly: FIRM classifies industrial robot capabilities and matches them to foodstuff characteristics and processing requirements through four steps and eight tasks. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Reducing the number of repetitive jobs by replacing them with robots is not replacing jobs but paving the way for more intelligent jobs.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [98] Grobbelaar, 2021, Analyzing human robotic interaction in the food industry, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. source
The paper’s Conclusions state the attributed point almost verbatim: replacing repetitive jobs with robots is presented as paving the way for more intelligent jobs. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“This work also identified many factors that should lay the groundwork for future research in the application of industrial robots within food manufacturing.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [102] Bader, 2020, A methodology for the selection of industrial robots in food handling, Innov. Food Sci. Emerg. Technol. source
The Conclusions explicitly state that the work identified factors laying the groundwork for future research on industrial robots in food manufacturing. The passage then gives examples, including bespoke grippers, hygiene, and operator training. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Transferring repetitive and dangerous tasks that humans are increasingly reluctant to perform to robots means that automation can help address the labour and skills crisis, and make the construction industry more attractive [110,111].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.7. Civil Engineering Industry
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [110] Aparicio, 2020, Robotics in construction: Framework and future directions, Int. J. High-Rise Build.
- Partly supportedcites [111] Follini, C., Magnago, V., Freitag, K., Terzer, M., Marcher, C., Riedl, M., Giusti, A., and Matt, D.T. (2021). Bim-integrated collaborative robotics for application in building construction and maintenance. Robotics, 10. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Introduction (page not provided) describes construction tasks as boring, repetitive, and hazardous, identifies low attractiveness as an industry problem, and calls automation promising. It does not say workers are increasingly reluctant to do those tasks or that transferring them to robots will address a labour and skills crisis or make the industry more attractive. (LLM, conf=0.85)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Technical and work-culture factors include an untrained workforce; unproven effectiveness and immature technology; and the current work culture and aversion to change [108].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.7. Civil Engineering Industry
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [108] Oyedele, 2019, Robotics and automated systems in construction: Understanding industry-specific challenges for adoption, J. Build. Eng. source
The Factors and Themes section explicitly groups an untrained workforce, unproved effectiveness/immature technology, and current work culture/aversion to change under “Technical and workculture factors.” Section 6.3 discusses the same factors as barriers to adopting robotics in construction. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“However, the trust in human-robotic interaction appears to be underdeveloped.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [98] Grobbelaar, 2021, Analyzing human robotic interaction in the food industry, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. source
The Conclusions section directly states that trust between humans and robots in human–robot interaction seems underdeveloped. The claim closely paraphrases that statement. (LLM, conf=0.95)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“This allows the machine to perform weeding and watering while maintaining the moisture content of the deep soil at 80 ± 10% and an average weeding rate of 90%.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [105] Chang, C.-L., and Lin, K.-M. (2018). Smart Agricultural Machine with a Computer Vision-Based Weeding and Variable-Rate Irrigation Scheme. Robotics, 7. source
The indexed paper’s Abstract (page not specified) states that the machine weeds and waters while maintaining deep-soil moisture at 80 ± 10% and achieving an average weeding rate of 90%. This matches the attributed claim. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“The system can classify plants and weeds in real time with an average classification rate of 90% or higher.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [105] Chang, C.-L., and Lin, K.-M. (2018). Smart Agricultural Machine with a Computer Vision-Based Weeding and Variable-Rate Irrigation Scheme. Robotics, 7. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
Section 2.1.1 describes the system’s weed/plant classification method, and Section 3.2 describes real-time observation of crops and weeds. The retrieved main-text passages do not establish an average classification rate of 90% or higher; that figure appears only in the Abstract, which is excluded as evidence under the stated rubric. (LLM, conf=0.73)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The proposed approach made the robot learn the task execution and compensate for the task uncertainties.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Industrial robot
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [90] Roveda, 2021, Human–robot collaboration in sensorless assembly task learning enhanced by uncertainties adaptation via Bayesian Optimization, Rob. Auton. Syst. source
The Conclusions state that validation experiments showed the robot learning the assembly task while compensating for task uncertainties. The Paper contribution section also describes learning a nominal task and re-optimizing it to address those uncertainties. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The task's execution time was reduced by 13.1% regarding the robot's default planner and 19.6% concerning the minimum jerk smooth collaboration planner.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > UR3 lightweight robot Experimental tasks
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [89] Rojas, 2021, Combining safety and speed in collaborative assembly systems—An approach to time optimal trajectories for collaborative robots, Procedia CIRP source
The Conclusions explicitly report a 13.1% reduction in task execution time relative to the robot’s default planner and a 19.6% reduction relative to the minimum-jerk smooth collaborative planner. The Experiment section identifies the three planners compared in the pick-and-pass task. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Effective robotic production still requires the communication and management of progressively improving materials and building systems.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Additive manufacturing. An overview
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [117] Bodea, S., Mindermann, P., Gresser, G.T., and Menges, A. (2021). Additive Manufacturing of Large Coreless Filament Wound Composite Elements for Building Construction. 3D Print. Addit. Manuf., ahead of print. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Conclusion and Outlook says efficient robotized production requires incremental advancement in communication and control that are aware of materials and building systems. The claim shifts that advancement to the materials and building systems themselves, which the passage does not support. (LLM, conf=0.82)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Partly supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“The emergence of robotics in business is widely seen across the world.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [98] Grobbelaar, 2021, Analyzing human robotic interaction in the food industry, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. source
The Conclusions state almost exactly that the emergence of robotics in business is widely seen across the world. The claim omits the paper’s subsequent observation about underdeveloped trust, but does not contradict it. (LLM, conf=0.95)
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“In particular, the HMM + BO methodology shows an assembly task success rate of 93%, while the HMM algorithm shows a success rate of only 19%.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Industrial robot
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [90] Roveda, 2021, Human–robot collaboration in sensorless assembly task learning enhanced by uncertainties adaptation via Bayesian Optimization, Rob. Auton. Syst. source
Section 6.4 (HMM+BO vs. HMM) reports a 93% successful assembly-task execution rate for HMM+BO and 19% for HMM alone, based on 150 repetitions per method. Section 1.3 (Paper contribution) also states both rates explicitly. (LLM, conf=0.95)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“Robotics is applied in food manufacture, packaging, delivery, and cookery (cake decoration) [98].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [98] Grobbelaar, 2021, Analyzing human robotic interaction in the food industry, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. source
The Abstract says robots are used in food production, packaging, and delivery. Section 3.6, “Bakery,” describes robotic cake decoration using an arm that pipes icing onto cakes. (LLM, conf=0.94)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
Every source the paper cites for this claim was checked and supports it.
In the paper
“According to the machining results of a cylinder head of a vehicle engine, the milling quality was improved obviously after the configuration optimisation, and the validity of these methods are verified.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Point selection method
What the sources say
- Supportedcites [85] Jiao, J., Tian, W., Zhang, L., Li, B., Hu, J., Li, Y., Li, D., and Zhang, J. (2020). Variable stiffness identification and configuration optimization of industrial robots for machining tasks. Res. Sq. source
The Machining Experiment section reports milling an automobile-engine cylinder head and finds that surface roughness fell from Ra 2.356 to Ra 0.597 after configuration optimization. The Conclusions explicitly state that milling quality improved and that the methods were verified. (LLM, conf=0.95)
boosteddirectSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Supported
The cited sources support only part of this claim — read each source’s verdict below.
In the paper
“Kinect could distinguish colour correctly, and the robot could accurately navigate to the detected object.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
What the sources say
- Partly supportedcites [82] Makomo, 2020, Real Time Application for Automatic Object and 3D Position Detection and Sorting with Robotic Manipulator, Sak. Univ. J. Sci. sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Abstract (page not provided) describes using a Kinect camera to locate objects and calculate a path for the robot to grasp them. It does not report that the Kinect distinguished colours correctly or that the robot navigated to detected objects accurately. (LLM, conf=0.82)
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Partly supported
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results of this review revealed four directions of required advancement in robotics: development of intelligent companions; improved implementation of AI-based solutions; robot-oriented design of objects; and psychological solutions for robot-human collaboration.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Abstract
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It is based on the approach that robots must limit humans in their workplace by creating closed robot cells in which human activity is unacceptable; if a human must enter the robot's workspace, the robot must be stopped.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2. Main Robotisation Strategies
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In 2020 the total number of industrial robots operating in factories globally reached 2.7 million.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] (2021, April 07). IFR Presents World Robotics Report 2020—International Federation of Robotics. Available online: https://ifr.org/ifr-press-releases/news/record-2.7-million-robots-work-in-factories-around-the-globe.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“According to [13], the definition of cobot was first used in a 1999 US patent [14] and was intended for “an apparatus and method for direct physical integration between a person and a general-purpose manipulator controlled by a computer.””
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] (2021, April 08). A Brief History of Collaborative Robots|Material Handling and Logistics. Available online: https://www.mhlnews.com/technology-automation/article/21124077/a-brief-history-of-collaborative-robots.
- Not matchedcites [14] Colgate, J.E., and Peshkin, M.A. (1999). Cobots. (5,952,796), U.S. Patent.
Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“In industrial robotics, five typical levels of human-robot cooperation are defined (Figure 2): (i) no collaboration; (ii) coexistence; (iii) synchronisation; (iv) cooperation; (v) collaboration [5].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2. Main Robotisation Strategies
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [5] Olivares-Alarcos, A., Foix, S., and Alenyà, G. (2019). On inferring intentions in shared tasks for industrial collaborative robots. Electronics, 8. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Moreover, the issue of implementing an industrial robot remains complicated by its interdisciplinary nature: proper organisation of the work cycle is the object of manufacturing management sciences; the design of grippers and related equipment lies within the field of mechanical engineering; and the integration of all devices into a united system, sensor data analysis and whole system control are”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 1. Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Evaluation of the use of the robots based on their number and real implementation price determined that implementation of robots positively affects productivity, which results in a positive impact for the most vulnerable workers in society, i.e., women, parttime workers, high-school graduates, and aged persons.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [4] Dekle, 2020, Robots and industrial labor: Evidence from Japan, J. Jpn. Int. Econ. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The classic strategy is well suited to robotisation of mass production processes in various fields, and its main advantages are clear requirements for work process organisation, robotic cell design, and installation; the availability of a large variety of standard equipment and typical partial solutions; and higher productivity and reliability compared to the cases where human workers perform the”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.1. Classical Robotisation Strategy
boosteddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result, the robotisation of even a relatively simple task becomes a complex solution requiring a systemic approach.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 1. Introduction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
In the paper
“In [11], a perspective non-linear model-based predictive control method for robotic manipulators, which minimises the settling time and position overshoot of each joint, is provided.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.1. Classical Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [11] Elsisi, 2021, Effective Nonlinear Model Predictive Control Scheme Tuned by Improved NN for Robotic Manipulators, IEEE Access source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Each robotisation task is unique in its own way.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 1. Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The main disadvantages are insufficient flexibility, unsuitability for unique production, and high economic costs when it is necessary to adapt the existing robotic cell to a new product or process.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.1. Classical Robotisation Strategy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is based on an opposing approach, and states that robots and humans can work in one workplace and collaborate.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2. Main Robotisation Strategies
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“The first lightweight cobot, LBR3, designed by a German robotics company, was introduced in 2004 [13].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] (2021, April 08). A Brief History of Collaborative Robots|Material Handling and Logistics. Available online: https://www.mhlnews.com/technology-automation/article/21124077/a-brief-history-of-collaborative-robots.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“According to the International Federation of Robotics (IRF) [2], 373,000 industrial robots were sold globally in 2019.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [2] (2021, April 07). IFR Presents World Robotics Report 2020—International Federation of Robotics. Available online: https://ifr.org/ifr-press-releases/news/record-2.7-million-robots-work-in-factories-around-the-globe.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“According to one of the biggest scientific databases, ScienceDirect [3], more than 4500 scientific papers were published in 2019 using the term “Industrial robot” as a keyword and, in 2020, the number of papers with a similar interest and research direction increased to 5300.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 1. Introduction
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [3] (2021, April 07). ScienceDirect Search Results—Keywords (Industrial Robot). Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/search?qs=Industrial%20robot.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The issue of data protection is also becoming more critical due to the latest communication technologies, such as 5G and 6G [18].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [18] Rao, 2018, Impact of 5G Technologies on Industry 4.0, Wirel. Pers. Commun. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“When a corner is detected, it takes just 0.003 s to output the target point.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Regional Proposal Network (RPN)
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [43] Tripicchio, 2020, A study on picking objects in cluttered environments: Exploiting depth features for a custom low-cost universal jamming gripper, Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This can be explained by the fact that experts better understand the overall manufacturing process and are more accustomed to operating with various equipment.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
What the paper did — it cites no source for this, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The surveyed articles were selected according to the direction of the literature review and the indicated criteria (application area, novelty and significance of achievements, reliability, and feasibility of results).”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 1. Introduction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Rests on an assumption: The 115 selected publications are representative of recent developments in industrial robotics.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The use of CAM software also requires highly qualified professionals.As a result, the application of this software to individual installations is economically disadvantageous.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“When using lines, the time required depends significantly on the configuration of the objects, and ranges from 0.02 s when the objects have almost the same depth, to 0.06 s in the worst case when the depth of the tactile objects is greater than the lowest depth but not perceived [43].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [43] Tripicchio, 2020, A study on picking objects in cluttered environments: Exploiting depth features for a custom low-cost universal jamming gripper, Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The presented method achieved identification accuracy of coal and gangue samples of 88.3% and 90.0%, and the average object mass centre coordinate errors in the x and y directions were 2.73% and 2.72%, respectively [42].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [42] Li, M., Duan, Y., He, X., and Yang, M. (2020). Image positioning and identification method and system for coal and gangue sorting robot. Int. J. Coal Prep. Util., 1–19. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“A personalised deep learning framework can adapt robot perception of children's affective states and engagement to different cultures and individuals.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.3. Medical Application
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [68] Rudovic, 2018, Personalized machine learning for robot perception of affect and engagement in autism therapy, Sci. Robot. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Because close interactions are the most difficult, it is crucial to consider a number of aspects to ensure a successful collaboration, i.e., a real-time algorithm, “touch” detection and analysis, autonomy, semantic understanding capabilities, and AI-aided anticipation skills.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.1. Human-Machine Interaction
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“This standard defines four main classes of safety requirements for collaborative robots: safety-rated monitored stop; hand-guiding; speed and separation monitoring; and power and force limiting.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [23] (2021, December 02). ISO—ISO/TS 15066:2016—Robots and Robotic Devices—Collaborative Robots. Available online: https://www.iso.org/standard/62996.html.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“they found that the main limitations preventing deep learning in medical robotics are the huge volume of training data required and a relatively long training time.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.3. Medical Application
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [65] Pierson, 2017, Deep learning in robotics: A review of recent research, Adv. Robot. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Using an Elite EC75 manipulator (Elite Robot, Suzhou, CN, an assembly time of less than 20 s was achieved, ensuring a 100% success rate from 30 attempts when the relative error between the peg and hole was ±4.5 mm, and the clearance between the peg and the hole was 0.18 mm.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [20] Song, 2021, A peg-in-hole robot assembly system based on Gauss mixture model, Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, it is necessary to note that the strict line between these strategies has gradually disappeared due to advances in sensing technologies, artificial intelligence, and computer vision.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“This automatic sorting robot can automatically sort construction and demolition waste ranging in size from 0.05 to 0.5 m.The online recognition accuracy of the developed sorting system reaches almost 100% and ensures operation speed up to 2028 picks/h.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [41] Xiao, 2020, Development of an automatic sorting robot for construction and demolition waste, Clean Technol. Environ. Policy source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, it is essential to mention that all improvements and advances in robotics can be classified into two main types: universal and application dependent.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the functionality of such software is relatively constrained and does not go beyond the framework of classical tasks, such as welding or milling.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The main impact of Industry 4.0 and new communication technologies on industrial robots is that their controllers have an increasing number of connections, functions, and protocols to communicate with other “smart” devices.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Compared to traditional industrial robots, cobots have more user-friendly control features and wider teaching options.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The obtained results showed that humans and robots could simultaneously work safely in a common area without any physical separation, and significantly reduce time and costs compared with manual operations.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [19] Usamentiaga, 2020, Symbiotic human–robot collaborative approach for increased productivity and enhanced safety in the aerospace manufacturing industry, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, any kind of path planning requires information about the initial robot position.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“A large number of reliable solutions have been tested in the industrial environment for the first trend, in contrast to the second and third cases, which are currently being developed.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Regional Proposal Network (RPN)
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Robotic technologies in dentistry can be used for maxillofacial surgery [70], tooth preparation [71], testing of toothbrushes [72], root canal treatment and plaque removal [73], orthodontics and jaw movement [74], tooth arrangement for full dentures [75], X-ray imaging radiography [76], swab sampling [77], etc.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.3. Medical Application
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [69] Grischke, 2020, Dentronics: Towards robotics and artificial intelligence in dentistry, Dent. Mater. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, both human and robot communication or interaction can be divided into two main categories: remote interaction and exact interaction.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.1. Human-Machine Interaction
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Achieved an average agreement of ~60% with human experts to estimate effect and engagement.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > GPA-net
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [68] Rudovic, 2018, Personalized machine learning for robot perception of affect and engagement in autism therapy, Sci. Robot. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The fourth industrial revolution-Industry 4.0-significantly fostered the development of cobot's technologies, because the concept fitted well with Industry 4.0 content, allowing human-robot collaboration to be realised and being suitable for flexible manufacturing systems.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“In 2008, the Danish manufacturer Universal Robots released the UR5, a cobot that could safely operate alongside the employees, eliminating the need for safety caging or fencing (Figure 3b).”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] (2021, April 08). A Brief History of Collaborative Robots|Material Handling and Logistics. Available online: https://www.mhlnews.com/technology-automation/article/21124077/a-brief-history-of-collaborative-robots.
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The process known as robotic navigation aims to achieve accurate positioning and avoiding obstacles in the pathway.It is essential to satisfy constraints such as limited operating space, distance, energy, and time [78].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [78] Jose, 2016, Task allocation and collision-free path planning of centralized multi-robots system for industrial plant inspection using heuristic methods, Rob. Auton. Syst. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“It can be seen that robots are still not very popular in this area, and technological and phycological/ethical factors can explain this.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.3. Medical Application
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- Rests on an assumption: Robots are still unreliable for a large portion of society, so they are only accepted with significant hesitation.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, employee attitudes depend on their practical experience: it was noticed that experts felt more confident than beginners.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [19] Usamentiaga, 2020, Symbiotic human–robot collaborative approach for increased productivity and enhanced safety in the aerospace manufacturing industry, Int. J. Adv. Manuf. Technol. source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The path trajectory formation process consists of these four separate modules: perception, when the robot receives the necessary information from the sensors; localisation, when the robot aims to control its position in the environment; path planning; and motion control [79].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [79] Das, 2020, Multi-robot path planning using improved particle swarm optimization algorithm through novel evolutionary operators, Appl. Soft Comput. J. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“To overcome the limitations caused by the lack of real-time path planning features in robot controllers, additional external controllers and real-time communication with the manipulator is required.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Typical industrial robots are not feasible for real-time path planning.
In the paper
“Experiments performed on solid waste image analysis resulted in a mean average precision value of 49.1%.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [40] Yu, 2020, A novel detection fusion network for solid waste sorting, Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The quote only partly states this claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As an alternative to CAM software, methods based on the copying movements of highly skilled specialists using commercially available equipment, such as MIMIC from Nordbo Robotics (Antvorskov, Denmark), may be used.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although the food industry is ranked fourth in terms of the mostautomated sectors, robotic devices capable of processing nutrients of different shapes and materials are in high demand.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The total global value of the construction industry is forecast to grow by 85% to USD 15.5 trillion by 2030 [109].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.7. Civil Engineering Industry
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [109] Robinson, G. (2016). Global Construction Market to Grow $8 Trillion by 2030: Driven by China, US and India, Global Construction Perspectives and Oxford Economics.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The system outperforms the operator performing the same task with magnified visual feedback regarding both completion time and the number of successful insertions.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Robotic assembly Error recovery using reverse execution
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The methodology reduced the average number of iterations and calibration times required to determine the optimal GPR model hyperparameters by 50.3% and 31.3%, respectively.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > KUKA KR500-3 6 DOF industrial robot
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Applications of robotic grippers in food, agricultural, and bio-system engineering were summarised in detail.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [104] Zhang, 2020, State-of-the-art robotic grippers, grasping and control strategies, as well as their applications in agricultural robots: A review, Comput. Electron. Agric. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Robots are used in planting, seedling identification, and sorting.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Artificial intelligence-enabled robotic applications are entering the restaurant industry in the food processing and guest service operations.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In the process of experimental verification, task-level planning can maintain the same accuracy as that of the traditional method but saves time when facing more complex tasks.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Real-time Closed Loop Compensation method
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [86] Ding, 2020, BIM-based task-level planning for robotic brick assembly through image-based 3D modeling, Adv. Eng. Inform. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The simplest visual system was used to follow a simplified approach, which can be controlled directly by a robot controller.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Objective Technology Approach Improvement Ref.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [114] Gautam, M., Fagerlund, H., Greicevci, B., Christophe, F., and Havula, J. (2020, January 27–28). Collaborative Robotics in Construction: A Test Case on Screwing Gypsum Boards on Ceiling. Proceedings of the 2020 5th International Conference on Green Technology and Sustainable Development, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“An industrial robot with only three joints is used, and the solutions of joint angles for the tool orientations are not proposed, which is essential for printing the freeform surface.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Industrial robot
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [91] Fu, 2020, A postprocessing and path optimization based on nonlinear error for multijoint industrial robot-based 3D printing, Int. J. Adv. Robot. Syst. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Drones and autonomous ground vehicles are used for crop monitoring and condition assessment.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The agriculture robot market size is expected to reach USD 16,640.4 billion by 2026; however, specific robots, rather than industrial robots, will occupy the majority of the market.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Furthermore, bypassing limitations in one area often ensures advances in robotics in other sectors.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, ASC considerably increases the cycle time for a toolpath that involves many direction reversals and leads to uneven cutter chip load and variation in surface finish.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Real-time Closed Loop Compensation method
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The proposed strategies can correctly diagnose the assembly process's position errors and effectively realise error recovery.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Robotic assembly Error recovery using reverse execution
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Presenting of light robotics together with 3D printing technology provides the rapid advantage of prototyping to test ideas and applications.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Objective Technology Approach Improvement Ref.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [114] Gautam, M., Fagerlund, H., Greicevci, B., Christophe, F., and Havula, J. (2020, January 27–28). Collaborative Robotics in Construction: A Test Case on Screwing Gypsum Boards on Ceiling. Proceedings of the 2020 5th International Conference on Green Technology and Sustainable Development, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“Additional benefits arise from supporting reversibility in robotic assembly language, namely, increased code reuse and automatically derived disassembly sequences.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Robotic assembly Error recovery using reverse execution
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [94] Ulidowski, 2020, Reversible control of robots, Reversible Computation: Extending Horizons of Computing. RC 2020. Lecture Notes in Computer Science)
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, the past year, particularly due to the circumstances of COVID-19, has been a breakthrough year in robotisation in the food industry.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Few classic robots are used in the construction process due to the dynamic and inaccurately described environment; however, work on 3D buildings and their environmental models reduces this limitation.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.7. Civil Engineering Industry
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Autonomous tractors perform the function of weeding and harvesting.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Agricultural robots are a specialised type of technology capable of assisting farmers with a wide range of operations.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“a simple conversion process is presented to convert the 3D placement point coordinates of each brick into the robotic control instructions.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Real-time Closed Loop Compensation method
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [86] Ding, 2020, BIM-based task-level planning for robotic brick assembly through image-based 3D modeling, Adv. Eng. Inform. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The developed method is feasible and sufficient to meet the specific precision requirements of some applications in robotic seam tracking.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Passive vision system image processing.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In animal husbandry, robots are used for feeding cattle, milking, collecting and sorting eggs, and autonomous cleaning of pens.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These robots possess mechanical arms and make harvesting much easier for farmers.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Cobots are also used in agriculture.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“In a review assessing the potential for process innovation in the restaurant sector, an information process for the use of new technologies for process innovation was developed [101].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.5. Food Industry
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [101] Alt, 2020, AI and robotics in the European restaurant sector: Assessing potentials for process innovation in a high-contact service industry, Electron. Mark.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
In the paper
“It uses an extrusion mechanism similar to the Contour Crafting machine to print layers having a height of 3.81 cm and a width of 2.54 cm, from concrete and mortar at different linear speeds (up to 10 cm/s) and deposition rates.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Objective Technology Approach Improvement Ref.
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [113] Kazemian, 2019, Computer vision for real-time extrusion quality monitoring and control in robotic construction, Autom. Constr. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The computed coordinates of the target 3D localisation have an average error of 5.5 cm, which is 92% more accurate than eye-tracking only for the point of gaze calculation, with an estimated error of 72 cm.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.4. Path Planning, Path Optimisation
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [87] Leroux, M., Raison, M., Adadja, T., and Achiche, S. (2015, January 11–12). Combination of eyetracking and computer vision for robotics control. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Technologies for Practical Robot Applications, TePRA, Woburn, MA, USA. source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Their primary role is to tackle labour intensive, repetitive, and physically demanding tasks.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.6. Agricultural Applications
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many automation cases are still limited by artificial intelligence (AI) issues related to object recognition, object position recognition, and decision generation for object grabbing and manipulating.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Computer vision, sensor fusion, and machine learning are becoming major engines driving industrial robots' wider application.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“They increase robots' flexibility and enable them to make smart adaptive solutions, although robots were initially designed only to perform repetitive actions.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“These improvements typically include the implementation of new mathematical methods for robot control or optimisation of energy consumption [118].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked — no full text of the sourcecites [118] Zhang, 2021, A data-driven method for optimizing the energy consumption of industrial robots, J. Clean. Prod. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Some application fields have no tradition in such activities, such as the civil engineering, food, and agriculture industries.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These approaches are starting to appear in home appliances, but market penetration of these solutions remains low.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In addition, the food, agriculture, and civil engineering industries aim to replace humans involved in repetitive actions.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This situation requires rethinking processes and possibly preparing objects for robotic processing, rather than using tremendous computing and multiplying hardware.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Although clamps and templates are currently used for specific industrial cases, general solutions have not yet been achieved.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Preparation of robots for an operation, particularly in dynamic, varying situations, is a time-and resource-consuming activity.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In contrast, medical applications are mainly related to accurate manipulation and hazardous environments.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This issue arises from the process of widening robotic implementation in existing industries, and therefore many technologies should be redesigned.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“For example, a previous study [119] provided a methodology that allows implementation of a non-typical Denavit-Hartenberg method for a delta robot.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [119] Aksoy, S., and Ozan, E. (2020). Robots and Their Applications. Int. Res. J. Eng. Technol.
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However, in this case, the introduction involves non-technical aspects such as human psychology and personal acceptance of the robots in their working place.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“At present, this area has few publications and technical solutions, and is in the research stage; presentations of some of the publicly available cases are at the level of scientific publications.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Therefore, a large amount of research focuses on enhancing human-robot interaction and path planning/optimisation issues.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Typically, these tasks are repetitive and extremely precise operations that require evaluating a considerable amount of data.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The main limitations and guidelines for further research are new intuitive control methods, user-friendly interfaces, specialised software, and real-time control methods.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In summary, the main limitations are the lack of suitable methods, high recognition accuracy, and performance requirements; varying environmental conditions; an excessive number of possible situations; and lack of reliable equipment (tools).”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, the implementation of robots for object recognition has three main functions in which robots replace humans: (1) extraction of useful information from massive data flow; (2) accurate movements to manipulate with an object or tool; and (3) repetitive action (sorting).”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Another aspect of the subjective attitude to robots is limited by their acceptance by managers and process designers; however, they are also lacking implementation experience and knowledge of cutting-edge achievements in robotic applications.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“provision of psychological solutions for robot-human collaboration and acceptance of robots in the workplace.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nevertheless, pressure due to the absence of a skilled labour force has led to new solutions.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Human-robot cooperation in classical industrial robots and in specialised cobot cases still demands an intensive introduction into these industries.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Notably, these limitations are unrelated to the robot's mechanical systems (except the tools).”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“For example, the implementation of computer vision to localise and manipulate randomly placed mechanical parts on a conveyor fostered the robotisation of sorting processes in all industry fields.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Nonetheless, despite the recent improvements and smart solutions realised in industrial robots, their widespread use in non-typical areas remains limited.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“These objects are widely used in industry and home appliances, and include textiles, clothes, and cables.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“As a result of the development of robot control systems, robots' internal structures have also been improved.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 4. Discussion
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Many general solutions using machine vision and sensor fusion (camera-lidar scanner, camera-distance sensors, etc.) have been spontaneously implemented in numerous industrial enterprises.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 5. Conclusions
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
The authors state this as an assumption.
The implementation of robotics in non-traditional applications is often limited not by technological issues, but by the company managers' attitudes.
“This approach confirms the assumption that the implementation of robotics in non-traditional applications is often limited not by technological issues, but by the company managers' attitudes.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The number of scientific publications in a database reflects scientific interest in the field.
“Scientific interest in this field is based on a steady increase in the number of publications, independent of the political, economic, and social factors affecting the market for new robots.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The 115 selected publications are representative of recent developments in industrial robotics.
“According to the search request, Google Scholar returned 79,500 results, from which 115 publications were selected.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Randomly placed unpredictable objects remain a challenge in robotics.
“Despite significant progress in existing technologies, randomly placed unpredictable objects remain a challenge in robotics.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Typical industrial robots are not feasible for real-time path planning.
“It is essential to note that typical industrial robots are not feasible for real-time path planning.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Robots are still unreliable for a large portion of society, so they are only accepted with significant hesitation.
“Regarding psychological and ethical factors, robots are still unreliable for a large portion of society.Therefore, they are only accepted with significant hesitation.”
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.2. Modern Robotisation Strategy
“AR seems to reduce physical workload, whereas the impact on mental workload depends on the interaction interface [16].”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > References
“16. Tran, M.Q.; Elsisi, M.; Mahmoud, K.; Liu, M.K.; Lehtonen, M.; Darwish, M.M.F. Experimental Setup for Online Fault Diagnosis of Induction Machines via Promising IoT and Machine Learning: Towards Industry 4.0 Empowerment.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.1. Classical Robotisation Strategy
“Research provided in [8] analyses the possibilities of implementing service robots in hotels from social, economic, and technical perspectives.”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 2.1. Classical Robotisation Strategy
“A similar study [8] analysed the design, engineering, and testing of adaptive automation assembly systems to increase automation levels, and to complement human workers' skills and capabilities in assembling industrial refrigerators.”
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > Coal and gangue sorting robot
“The average coordinate errors in the x and y directions are 2.73% and 2.72%, and the identification accuracy of coal and gangue samples is 88.3% and 90.0%, respectively, and the sum of the time for identification, positioning, and opening the camera for a single sample averaged 0.130 s. [41,51,52]”
§ Advanced Applications of Industrial Robotics: New Trends and Possibilities > 3.2. Object Recognition
“Furthermore, Wen Xiao et al. designed an automatic sorting robot that uses height maps and near-infrared (NIR) hyperspectral images to locate the region of interest (ROI) of objects, and to perform online statistic pixel-based classification in contours [41].This automatic sorting robot can automatically sort construction and demolition waste ranging in size from 0.05 to 0.5 m.”
Citations
Cites
Patrício, D., & Rieder, R. (2018) · Computers and Electronics in Agriculture · doi:10.1016/j.compag.2018.08.001 · Cited by 1,007
Human–Robot Collaboration in Manufacturing Applications: A Review
Matheson, E., Minto, R., Zampieri, E. G. G., Faccio, M., & Rosati, G. (2019) · Robotics · doi:10.3390/robotics8040100 · Cited by 668
A Machine Learning Approach to Visual Perception of Forest Trails for Mobile Robots
Giusti, A., Guzzi, J., Ciresan, D. C., He, F.-L., Rodriguez, J. P., Fontana, F., Faessler, M., Forster, C., Schmidhuber, J., Caro, G. D., et al. (2016) · IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · doi:10.1109/lra.2015.2509024 · Cited by 665
Human Emotion Recognition: Review of Sensors and Methods
Dzedzickis, A., Kaklauskas, A., & Bučinskas, V. (2020) · Sensors · doi:10.3390/s20030592 · Cited by 628
Self-citationDavila Delgado, J. M., Oyedele, L., Ajayi, A., Akanbi, L., Akinade, O., Bilal, M., & Owolabi, H. (2019) · Journal of Building Engineering · doi:10.1016/j.jobe.2019.100868 · Cited by 607
Zhang, B., Xie, Y., Zhou, J., Wang, K., & Zhang, Z. (2020) · Computers and Electronics in Agriculture · doi:10.1016/j.compag.2020.105694 · Cited by 484
A review of verbal and non-verbal human–robot interactive communication
Mavridis, N. (2015) · Robotics and Autonomous Systems · doi:10.1016/j.robot.2014.09.031 · Cited by 453
Impact of 5G Technologies on Industry 4.0
Rao, S. K., & Prasad, R. (2018) · Wireless Personal Communications · doi:10.1007/s11277-018-5615-7 · Cited by 369
Deep learning in robotics: A review of recent research
Pierson, H. A., & Gashler, M. S. (2017) · Advanced Robotics · doi:10.1080/01691864.2017.1365009 · Cited by 331
Personalized machine learning for robot perception of affect and engagement in autism therapy
Rudovic, O., Lee, J., Dai, M., Schuller, B., & Picard, R. W. (2018) · Science Robotics · doi:10.1126/scirobotics.aao6760 · Cited by 316
Research works printed but not linked: 5
- (2021, April 07). IFR Presents World Robotics Report 2020—International Federation of Robotics. Available online: https://ifr.org/ifr-press-releases/news/record-2.7-million-robots-work-in-factories-around-the-globe.
- (2021, April 07). ScienceDirect Search Results—Keywords (Industrial Robot). Available online: https://www.sciencedirect.com/search?qs=Industrial%20robot.
- Shubha, 2020, International Journal of Engineering Technology Research & Management: A review of multi object recognition based on deep learining, Int. J. Eng. Technol. Res. Manag., 2, 27
- Robinson, G. (2016). Global Construction Market to Grow $8 Trillion by 2030: Driven by China, US and India, Global Construction Perspectives and Oxford Economics.
- Ghasempourabadi, 2021, Human-robot interaction in construction: A literature review, Malays. J. Sustain. Environ., 8, 49
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Edge computing for Industry 5.0: fundamental, applications and research challenges
Sharma, M., Tomar, A., & Hazra, A. (2024) · IEEE Internet of Things Journal · doi:10.1109/jiot.2024.3359297 · Cited by 312
Zhou, W. H., Yan, Z., & Chen, Y. (2024) · Energy Economics · doi:10.1016/j.eneco.2024.107355 · Cited by 237
Food processing 4.0: Current and future developments spurred by the fourth industrial revolution
Hassoun, A., Jagtap, S., Trollman, H., Garcia‐Garcia, G., Abdullah, N. A., Gökşen, G., Bader, F., Özoğul, F., Barba, F. J., Cropotova, J., et al. (2022) · Food Control · doi:10.1016/j.foodcont.2022.109507 · Cited by 212
Sarker, A., Islam, M. T., & Islam, M. R. (2024) · Advanced Intelligent Systems · doi:10.1002/aisy.202400414 · Cited by 149
Hassoun, A., Marvin, H. J. P., Bouzembrak, Y., Barba, F. J., Castagnini, J. M., Pallarés, N., Rabail, R., Aadil, R. M., Bangar, S. P., Bhat, R., et al. (2023) · Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems · doi:10.3389/fsufs.2023.1217813 · Cited by 94
Metadata
- Authors
- Dzedzickis, A., Subačiūtė-Žemaitienė, J., Šutinys, E., Samukaitė-Bubnienė, U., & Bučinskas, V.
- Affiliations
- Vilnius Gediminas Technical University (LT)
- Corresponding author
- Dzedzickis, Andrius
- Samukaitė-Bubnienė, Urtė
- ORCID
- Venue
- Applied Sciences
- Publisher
- MDPI AG
- Published
- 2021-12-23
- Volume
- 12
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 135
- ISSN
- 2076-3417 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W4200514762
- Semantic Scholar
- a571f3a7e3a14b8c1212966941c8147bd9f69b26
- Cited by
- 228
- References
- 108
- Citations by year
- 2026: 49 · 2025: 68 · 2024: 62 · 2023: 34 · 2022: 15
- FWCI
- 12.34
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Applied Sciences (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- European Commission (2014‐2020, 826060, H2020/2014-2020)
- Electronic Components and Systems for European Leadership (H2020/2014‐2020, 826060)
- Horizon 2020 Framework Programme (H2020/2014–2020, 826060)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robotics and Automated Systems
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
- Keywords
- industrial robotics, human-robot collaboration, artificial intelligence in robotics
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-04, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-04 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
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