Searcharxiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1107.5387

Controlling wheelchairs by body motions: A learning framework for the adaptive remapping of space

Tauseef Gulrez·Alessandro Tognetti·Alon Fishbach·Santiago Acosta·Christopher Scharver·Danilo De Rossi·Ferdinando A. Mussa-Ivaldi
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Learning to operate a vehicle is generally accomplished by forming a new cognitive map between the body motions and extrapersonal space. Here, we consider the challenge of remapping movement-to-space representations in survivors of spinal cord injury, for the control of powered wheelchairs. Our goal is to facilitate this remapping by developing interfaces between residual body motions and navigational commands that exploit the degrees of freedom that disabled individuals are most capable to coordinate. We present a new framework for allowing spinal cord injured persons to control powered wheelchairs through signals derived from their residual mobility. The main novelty of this approach lies in substituting the more common joystick controllers of powered wheelchairs with a sensor shirt. This allows the whole upper body of the user to operate as an adaptive joystick. Considerations about learning and risks have lead us to develop a safe testing environment in 3D Virtual Reality. A Personal Augmented Reality Immersive System (PARIS) allows us to analyse learning skills and provide users with an adequate training to control a simulated wheelchair through the signals generated by body motions in a safe environment. We provide a description of the basic theory, of the development phases and of the operation of the complete system. We also present preliminary results illustrating the processing of the data and supporting of the feasibility of this approach.

Explore related subjects

cs.ROcs.AIcs.NE

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Tauseef Gulrez, Alessandro Tognetti, Alon Fishbach, Santiago Acosta, Christopher Scharver, Danilo De Rossi, Ferdinando A. Mussa-Ivaldi. 2011-07-27. Controlling wheelchairs by body motions: A learning framework for the adaptive remapping of space. https://arxiv.org/abs/1107.5387

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO↗
arXiv2026

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO↗
arXiv2026

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO↗