SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2407.02664

The path towards contact-based physical human-robot interaction

Abstract

With the advancements in human-robot interaction (HRI), robots are now capable of operating in close proximity and engaging in physical interactions with humans (pHRI). Likewise, contact-based pHRI is becoming increasingly common as robots are equipped with a range of sensors to perceive human motions. Despite the presence of surveys exploring various aspects of HRI and pHRI, there is presently a gap in comprehensive studies that collect, organize and relate developments across all aspects of contact-based pHRI. It has become challenging to gain a comprehensive understanding of the current state of the field, thoroughly analyze the aspects that have been covered, and identify areas needing further attention. Hence, the present survey. While it includes key developments in pHRI, a particular focus is placed on contact-based interaction, which has numerous applications in industrial, rehabilitation and medical robotics. Across the literature, a common denominator is the importance to establish a safe, compliant and human intention-oriented interaction. This endeavour encompasses aspects of perception, planning and control, and how they work together to enhance safety and reliability. Notably, the survey highlights the application of data-driven techniques: backed by a growing body of literature demonstrating their effectiveness, approaches like reinforcement learning and learning from demonstration have become key to improving robot perception and decision-making within complex and uncertain pHRI scenarios. As the field is yet in its early stage, these observations may help guide future developments and steer research towards the responsible integration of physically interactive robots into workplaces, public spaces, and elements of private life.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mohammad Farajtabar, Marie Charbonneau. 2024-07-02. The path towards contact-based physical human-robot interaction. https://arxiv.org/abs/2407.02664

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

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

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

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