Test–Retest Repeatability of Human Gestures in Manipulation Tasks
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Participants, Experimental Set-Up and Protocol
2.2. Data Analysis
- Mann–Whitney U test (2-tails, significance level: α = 0.05) to verify the eventual presence of differences between males and females;
- Mann–Whitney U test (2-tails, significance level: α = 0.05) to verify the eventual presence of differences among the three test modalities (rFR, lFR, lLA);
- Wilcoxon test (2-tails, significance level: α = 0.05) to investigate the eventual presence of statistical differences among normal movements; visual, abrupt movements; and acoustic, abrupt movements, for each modality.
- Considering all participants (all);
- Excluding the outliers, automatically identified as participants with acceleration RMS values exceeding 1.5 times the interquartile range above the 75th quartile or below the 25th quartile (no_o);
- Considering only the participants who performed the retest after less than 45 days from the test (u_45);
- Considering only the participants who performed the retest after at least 45 days from the test (o_45).
3. Results
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Informed Consent Statement
Conflicts of Interest
References
- ISO/TS 15066:2016; Robots and Robotic Devices—Collaborative Robots. ISO: Geneva, Switzerland, 2016.
- Digo, E.; Antonelli, M.; Cornagliotto, V.; Pastorelli, S.; Gastaldi, L. Collection and analysis of human upper limbs motion features for collaborative robotic applications. Robotics 2020, 9, 33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Digo, E.; Gastaldi, L.; Antonelli, M.; Pastorelli, S.; Cereatti, A.; Caruso, M. Real-time estimation of upper limbs kinematics with IMUs during typical industrial gestures. Procedia Comput. Sci. 2022, 200, 1041–1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Boldo, M.; Bombieri, N.; Centomo, S.; De Marchi, M.; Demrozi, F.; Pravadelli, G.; Quaglia, D.; Turetta, C. Integrating Wearable and Camera Based Monitoring in the Digital Twin for Safety Assessment in the Industry 4.0 Era. Lecture Notes in Computer Science (Including Subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics). In Leveraging Applications of Formal Methods, Verification and Validation, Practice: Proceedings of the 11th International Symposium, ISoLA 2022, Rhodes, Greece, 22–30 October 2022; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; Volume 13704, pp. 184–194. [Google Scholar]
- De Feudis, I.; Buongiorno, D.; Grossi, S.; Losito, G.; Brunetti, A.; Longo, N.; Di Stefano, G.; Bevilacqua, V. Evaluation of Vision-Based Hand Tool Tracking Methods for Quality Assessment and Training in Human-Centered Industry 4.0. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 1796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Cohen, Y.; Faccio, M.; Galizia, F.G.; Mora, C.; Pilati, F. Assembly system configuration through Industry 4.0 principles: The expected change in the actual paradigms. IFAC-PapersOnLine 2017, 50, 14958–14963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Meziane, R.; Li, P.; Otis, M.J.D.; Ezzaidi, H.; Cardou, P. Safer hybrid workspace using human-robot interaction while sharing production activities. In Proceedings of the ROSE 2014—2014 IEEE International Symposium on RObotic and SEnsors Environments, Timisoara, Romania, 16–18 October 2014; pp. 37–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kirschner, R.J.; Burr, L.; Porzenheim, M.; Mayer, H.; Abdolshah, S.; Haddadin, S. Involuntary motion in human-robot interaction: Effect of interactive user training on the occurrence of human startle-surprise motion. In Proceedings of the ISR 2021—2021 IEEE International Conference on Intelligence and Safety for Robotics, Nagoya, Japan, 4–6 March 2021; pp. 28–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Görür, O.C.; Rosman, B.; Sivrikaya, F.; Albayrak, S. Social Cobots: Anticipatory Decision-Making for Collaborative Robots Incorporating Unexpected Human Behaviors. In Proceedings of the ACM/IEEE International Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, Chicago, IL, USA, 5–8 March 2018; pp. 398–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Rosso, V.; Gastaldi, L.; Pastorelli, S. Detecting Impulsive Movements to Increase Operators’ Safety in Manufacturing. In Mechanisms and Machine Science: Proceedings of the I4SDG Workshop 2021; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2022; Volume 108, pp. 174–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Polito, M.; Digo, E.; Pastorelli, S.; Gastaldi, L. Deep Learning Technique to Identify Abrupt Movements in Human-Robot Collaboration. In Mechanisms and Machine Science: Proceedings of the I4SDG Workshop 2023; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2023; pp. 73–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Digo, E.; Pastorelli, S.; Gastaldi, L. A Narrative Review on Wearable Inertial Sensors for Human Motion Tracking in Industrial Scenarios. Robotics 2022, 11, 138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Añazco, E.V.; Han, S.J.; Kim, K.; Lopez, P.R.; Kim, T.S.; Lee, S. Hand gesture recognition using single patchable six-axis inertial measurement unit via recurrent neural networks. Sensors 2021, 21, 1404. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Rivera, P.; Valarezo, E.; Choi, M.-T.; Kim, T.-S. Recognition of Human Hand Activities Based on a Single Wrist IMU Using Recurrent Neural Networks. Int. J. Pharma Med. Biol. Sci. 2017, 6, 114–118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sopidis, G.; Haslgrübler, M.; Azadi, B.; Anzengruber-Tánase, B.; Ahmad, A.; Ferscha, A.; Baresch, M.; Baresch, M. Micro-Activity Recognition in Industrial Assembly Process with IMU Data and Deep Learning; Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY, USA, 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bangaru, S.S.; Wang, C.; Aghazadeh, F. Data quality and reliability assessment of wearable emg and IMU sensor for construction activity recognition. Sensors 2020, 20, 5264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Teufl, W.; Miezal, M.; Taetz, B.; Fröhlich, M.; Bleser, G. Validity, test-retest reliability and long-term stability of magnetometer free inertial sensor based 3D joint kinematics. Sensors 2018, 18, 1980. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Wilmes, E.; Bastiaansen, B.J.C.; de Ruiter, C.J.; Vegter, R.J.K.; Brink, M.S.; Weersma, H.; Goedhart, E.A.; Lemmink, K.A.P.M.; Savelsbergh, G.J.P. Construct Validity and Test-Retest Reliability of Hip Load Compared with Playerload During Football-Specific Running, Kicking, and Jumping Tasks. Int. J. Sports Physiol. Perform. 2023, 18, 3–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Henriksen, M.; Lund, H.; Moe-Nilssen, R.; Bliddal, H.; Danneskiod-Samsøe, B. Test-retest reliability of trunk accelerometric gait analysis. Gait Posture 2004, 19, 288–297. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Weir, J.P. Quantifying Test-Retest Reliability Using the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient and the Sem. J. Strength Cond. Res. 2005, 19, 231–240. [Google Scholar] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Moe-Nilssen, R. Test-Retest Reliability of Trunk Accelerometry During Standing and Walking. Arch. Phys. Med. Rehabil. 1998, 79, 1377–1385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Koo, T.K.; Li, M.Y. A Guideline of Selecting and Reporting Intraclass Correlation Coefficients for Reliability Research. J. Chiropr. Med. 2016, 15, 155–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Shechtman, O. The Coefficient of Variation as an Index. of Measurement Reliability. In Methods of Clinical Epidemiology; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013; pp. 39–49. [Google Scholar]
- Peppoloni, L.; Filippeschi, A.; Ruffaldi, E. Assessment of task ergonomics with an upper limb wearable device. In Proceedings of the 22nd Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED 2014), Palermo, Italy, 16–19 June 2014; pp. 340–345. [Google Scholar]
- Giannini, P.; Bassani, G.; Avizzano, C.A.; Filippeschi, A. Wearable sensor network for biomechanical overload assessment in manual material handling. Sensors 2020, 20, 3877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yan, X.; Li, H.; Li, A.R.; Zhang, H. Wearable IMU-based real-time motion warning system for construction workers’ musculoskeletal disorders prevention. Autom. Constr. 2017, 74, 2–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Li, J.; Lu, Y.; Nan, Y.; He, L.; Wang, X.; Niu, D. A Study on Posture Analysis of Assembly Line Workers in a Manufacturing Industry. In Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing: Proceedings of the 20th Congress of the International Ergonomics Association (IEA 2018), Florence, Italy, 26–30 August 2018; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany; Volume 820, pp. 380–386. [CrossRef]
- Al-Yacoub, A.; Buerkle, A.; Flanagan, M.; Ferreira, P.; Hubbard, E.M.; Lohse, N. Effective Human-Robot Collaboration through Wearable Sensors. In Proceedings of the 25th IEEE International Conference on Emerging Technologies and Factory Automation (ETFA 2020), Vienna, Austria, 8–11 September 2020; pp. 651–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Resende, A.; Cerqueira, S.; Barbosa, J.; Damasio, E.; Pombeiro, A.; Silva, A.; Santos, C. Ergowear: An ambulatory, non-intrusive, and interoperable system towards a Human-Aware Human-robot Collaborative framework. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Autonomous Robot Systems and Competitions (ICARSC), Santa Maria da Feira, Portugal, 28–29 April 2021; pp. 56–61. [Google Scholar]
- Škulj, G.; Vrabič, R.; Podržaj, P. A Wearable IMU System for Flexible Teleoperation of a Collaborative Industrial Robot. Sensors 2021, 21, 5871. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Chico, A.; Cruz, P.J.; Vásconez, J.P.; Benalcázar, M.E.; Álvarez, R.; Barona, L.; Valdivieso, Á.L. Hand Gesture Recognition and Tracking Control for a Virtual UR5 Robot Manipulator. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE Fifth Ecuador Technical Chapters Meeting (ETCM), Cuenca, Ecuador, 12–15 October 2021; pp. 1–6. [Google Scholar]
ICC (3,1) | Lower Limit 95% CI for ICC (3,1) | Upper Limit 95% CI for ICC (3,1) | ICC (1,1) | Lower Limit 95% CI for ICC (1,1) | Upper Limit 95% CI for ICC (1,1) | CV (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
rFR | all | 0.37 | −0.02 | 0.66 | 0.34 | −0.05 | 0.63 | 11.31 |
no_o | 0.37 | −0.02 | 0.66 | 0.34 | −0.05 | 0.63 | 11.31 | |
u45 | 0.81 | 0.51 | 0.94 | 0.82 | 0.55 | 0.94 | 5.64 | |
o45 | −0.20 | −0.68 | 0.40 | −0.27 | −0.71 | 0.32 | 17.92 | |
lFR | all | 0.52 | 0.17 | 0.75 | 0.52 | 0.18 | 0.75 | 9.85 |
no_o | 0.64 | 0.33 | 0.82 | 0.65 | 0.35 | 0.83 | 8.60 | |
u45 | 0.77 | 0.43 | 0.92 | 0.78 | 0.47 | 0.93 | 6.43 | |
o45 | 0.09 | −0.49 | 0.61 | 0.11 | −0.46 | 0.62 | 13.83 | |
lLA | all | 0.63 | 0.33 | 0.82 | 0.64 | 0.34 | 0.82 | 8.54 |
no_o | 0.72 | 0.45 | 0.87 | 0.72 | 0.47 | 0.87 | 7.54 | |
u45 | 0.75 | 0.38 | 0.91 | 0.75 | 0.39 | 0.91 | 6.50 | |
o45 | 0.44 | −0.15 | 0.80 | 0.47 | −0.09 | 0.81 | 10.92 |
ICC (3,1) | Lower Limit 95% CI for ICC (3,1) | Upper Limit 95% CI for ICC (3,1) | ICC (1,1) | Lower Limit 95% CI for ICC (1,1) | Upper Limit 95% CI for ICC (1,1) | CV (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
rFR | all | 0.34 | −0.05 | 0.64 | 0.36 | −0.02 | 0.65 | 19.08 |
no_o | 0.34 | −0.05 | 0.64 | 0.36 | −0.02 | 0.65 | 19.08 | |
u45 | 0.53 | 0.03 | 0.82 | 0.54 | 0.06 | 0.82 | 15.00 | |
o45 | 0.14 | −0.45 | 0.64 | 0.18 | −0.40 | 0.66 | 23.33 | |
lFR | all | 0.45 | 0.08 | 0.71 | 0.46 | 0.10 | 0.72 | 16.31 |
no_o | 0.51 | 0.16 | 0.75 | 0.52 | 0.18 | 0.76 | 15.44 | |
u45 | 0.62 | 0.15 | 0.86 | 0.64 | 0.20 | 0.87 | 12.86 | |
o45 | 0.11 | −0.48 | 0.62 | 0.15 | −0.42 | 0.64 | 20.33 | |
lLA | all | 0.46 | 0.09 | 0.71 | 0.43 | 0.06 | 0.70 | 16.04 |
no_o | 0.71 | 0.43 | 0.87 | 0.68 | 0.39 | 0.85 | 12.22 | |
u45 | 0.25 | −0.30 | 0.68 | 0.27 | −0.27 | 0.68 | 17.71 | |
o45 | 0.77 | 0.37 | 0.93 | 0.69 | 0.25 | 0.90 | 14.08 |
ICC (3,1) | Lower Limit 95% CI for ICC (3,1) | Upper Limit 95% CI for ICC (3,1) | ICC (1,1) | Lower Limit 95% CI for ICC (1,1) | Upper Limit 95% CI for ICC (1,1) | CV (%) | ||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
rFR | all | 0.57 | 0.25 | 0.78 | 0.58 | 0.25 | 0.78 | 13.42 |
no_o | 0.52 | 0.17 | 0.76 | 0.53 | 0.19 | 0.76 | 12.96 | |
u45 | 0.62 | 0.16 | 0.86 | 0.59 | 0.12 | 0.85 | 15.64 | |
o45 | 0.53 | −0.03 | 0.84 | 0.55 | 0.02 | 0.84 | 10.83 | |
lFR | all | 0.50 | 0.14 | 0.74 | 0.51 | 0.16 | 0.74 | 13.65 |
no_o | 0.78 | 0.55 | 0.90 | 0.78 | 0.71 | 0.95 | 10.34 | |
u45 | 0.69 | 0.27 | 0.89 | 0.71 | 0.32 | 0.89 | 13.64 | |
o45 | 0.08 | −0.50 | 0.60 | 0.11 | −0.46 | 0.62 | 13.67 | |
lLA | all | 0.61 | 0.30 | 0.81 | 0.62 | 0.31 | 0.81 | 13.19 |
no_o | 0.77 | 0.54 | 0.89 | 0.77 | 0.54 | 0.89 | 10.71 | |
u45 | 0.68 | 0.26 | 0.89 | 0.70 | 0.31 | 0.89 | 14.14 | |
o45 | 0.34 | −0.26 | 0.75 | 0.30 | −0.28 | 0.73 | 12.08 |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2023 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Digo, E.; Caselli, E.; Polito, M.; Antonelli, M.; Gastaldi, L.; Pastorelli, S. Test–Retest Repeatability of Human Gestures in Manipulation Tasks. Appl. Sci. 2023, 13, 7808. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13137808
Digo E, Caselli E, Polito M, Antonelli M, Gastaldi L, Pastorelli S. Test–Retest Repeatability of Human Gestures in Manipulation Tasks. Applied Sciences. 2023; 13(13):7808. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13137808
Chicago/Turabian StyleDigo, Elisa, Elena Caselli, Michele Polito, Mattia Antonelli, Laura Gastaldi, and Stefano Pastorelli. 2023. "Test–Retest Repeatability of Human Gestures in Manipulation Tasks" Applied Sciences 13, no. 13: 7808. https://doi.org/10.3390/app13137808