Human Factors Design and Evaluation of China’s Space Manipulator Teleoperation System

References

• Behnke, R., & Elzer, P. F. (2001). A user interface for telecontrol of a robot over the internet. IFAC Proceedings Volumes, 34(9), 315–320. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1474-6670(17)41724-1
   Google Scholar
• Chen, S., Jiang, G., & Wang, C. (2015). Advancement in space human factors engineering. Manned Spaceflight, 21(2), 95–105. https://doi.org/10.16329/j.cnki.zrht.2015.02.001
   Google Scholar
• Chi, H. (2021). Manipulation of international space station manipulator. Space Exploration, (9), 44–47. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1009-6205.2021.09.011
   Google Scholar
• Deng, W. Y. (2000). The factors influencing ATC controller’s focusing attention and the model of attention distribution. Air Traffic Management, (6), 53–55.
   Google Scholar
• Endsley, M. R. (1995). Toward a theory of situation awareness in dynamic systems. Human Factors: The Journal of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 37(1), 32–64. https://doi.org/10.1518/001872095779049543
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Endsley, M. R., & Connors, E. S. (2008). Situation awareness: State of the art. Paper presented at the [Paper presentation]. Power & Energy Society General Meeting-Conversion & Delivery of Electrical Energy in the 21st Century, IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/PES.2008.4596937
   Google Scholar
• Forman, R. E. (2011). [Objective performance metrics for improved space telerobotics training]. [Doctoral dissertation]. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Hart, S. G., & Staveland, L. E. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. Advances in Psychology, 52(6), 139–183. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0166-4115(08)62386-9
   Google Scholar
• Hou, J. (2007). [Research on stereo vision and visual navigation for a lunar Rover]. [Doctoral dissertation]. Harbin Institute of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Hu, C., Gao, S., Xiong, M., Tang, Z., Wang, Y., Liang, C., Li, D., Zhang, W., Chen, L., Zeng, L., Liu, X., Wang, R., Wei, Q., Zhu, C., Pan, D., Xin, P., Yang, H., Luo, W., Liu, D., Zhou, J., & Dong, N. (2022). Key technologies of the China space station core module manipulator. Scientia Sinica Technologica, 52(9), 1299–1331. https://doi.org/10.1360/SST-2021-0507
   Google Scholar
• Lamb, P., & Owen, D. (2005). Human performance in space telerobotic manipulation [Paper presentation]. ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, California, USA. 31–37. https://doi.org/10.1145/1101616.1101624
   Google Scholar
• Lapointe, J. F., Dupuis, E., Hartman, L., & Gillett, R. (2002). An analysis of low-earth orbit space operations. Paper presented at the ACE-AE 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Marquez, J. J., Chang, M. L., Beard, B. L., Yun, K. K., & Karasinski, J. A. (2018). Human-Automation Allocations for Current Robotic Space Operations [Paper presentation]. Paper presented at the Human Research Program Investigators’ Workshop,.
   Google Scholar
• Martin, V., David, D, Woods, Flip, & Phillips (2005). Overcoming the Keyhole in Human-Robot Coordination: Simulation and Evaluation. Proceedings of the Human Factors & Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting.
   Google Scholar
• Menchaca Brandan, M., A. (2007). [Massachusetts Institute of Technology]. [Doctoral dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology]. Influence of spatial orientation and spatial visualization abilities on space teleoperation performance.
   Google Scholar
• Menchaca-Brandan, M. A., Liu, A. M., Oman, C. M., & Natapoff, A. (2007)., March 10-12, 2007). Influence of perspective-taking and mental rotation abilities in space teleoperation [Paper presentation]. Second ACM SIGCHI/SIGART Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI 2007, Arlington, Virginia, USA. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the https://doi.org/10.1145/1228716.1228753
   Google Scholar
• Mora-Serrano, J. (2022). Critical analysis of the evaluation methods of extended reality (XR) experiences for construction safety. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 15272. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192215272
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pan, D., Zhang, Y., Li, Z., & Tian, Z. (2016). Association of individual characteristics with teleoperation performance. Aerospace Medicine and Human Performance, 87(9), 772–780. https://doi.org/10.3357/amhp.4557.2016
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riley, J., Kaber, D., & Draper, J. (2004). Situation awareness and attention allocation measures for quantifying telepresence experiences in teleoperation. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 14(1), 51–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/hfm.10050
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silva-Martinez, J. (2016). Human systems integration: Process to help minimize human errors, a systems engineering perspective for human space exploration missions. REACH, 2-4, 8–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.reach.2016.11.003
   Google Scholar
• Steinfeld, A., Fong, T., Kaber, D., Lewis, M., Scholtz, J., Schultz, A., & Goodrich, M. (2006)., March 2-3, 2006). Common metrics for human-robot interaction [Paper presentation]. Proceedings of the 1st ACM SIGCHI/SIGART Conference on Human-Robot Interaction, HRI 2006, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. Paper presented at the https://doi.org/10.1145/1121241.1121249
   Google Scholar
• Tang, W., Chen, S., & Xiao, Y. (2016). Analysis of cognitive function in robotics teleoperation. Manned Spaceflight, 22(2), 262–268. https://doi.org/10.16329/j.cnki.zrht.2016.01.020
   Google Scholar
• Tang, W., Chen, S., Yi, X., Jiang, G., & Tian, Z. (2017). Visual information presentation mode for teleoperation of manipulator. Space Medicine & Medical Engineering, 30(1), 73–78. https://doi.org/10.16289/j.cnki.1002-0837.2017.01.012
   Google Scholar
• Tan, C., Xing, Q., & Song, H. (2021). What makes the memory go wrong? A review of the factors affecting false memories. Journal of Leshan Normal University, 36(3), 122–128. https://doi.org/10.16069/j.cnki.51-1610/g4.202L03.017
   Google Scholar
• Wang, C., Xue, S., Jiang, T., & Tan, L. (2022). Overview of ergonomic research on manipulation of space station manipulator. Aerospace China, (4), 23–29. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1002-7742.2022.04.004
   Google Scholar
• Weber, B. M., Schätzle, S., & Stelzer, M. (2022). Aiming performance during spaceflight: Individual adaptation to microgravity and the benefits of haptic support. Applied Ergonomics, 103, 103791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apergo.2022.103791
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woods, D. D., Tittle, J., Feil, M., & Roesler, A. (2004). Envisioning human–robot coordination in future operations. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews), 34(2), 210–218. https://doi.org/10.1109/TSMCC.2004.826272
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Xue, S., Jiang, G., Tian, Z., & Jiang, T. (2014). Progress of the key technologies in human-computer interface in space teleoperation. Manned Spaceflight, 20(5), 497–502. https://doi.org/10.16329/j.cnki.zrht.2014.05.017
   Google Scholar
• Xue, S., Tian, Z., Wang, C., Jiang, T., Wang, L., & Jiang, G. (2017). Analysis of operators’ situation awareness towards manipulator teleoperation. Space Medicine & Medical Engineering, 30(6), 431–437. https://doi.org/10.16289/j.cnki.1002-0837.2017.06.008
   Google Scholar
• Zefran, M., Bullo, F., & Stein, M. (2001). A notion of passivity for hybrid systems [Paper presentation]. IEEE Conference on Decision & Control, Paper presented at the.
   Google Scholar
• Zhang, K., Zhou, H., Wen, Q., & Sang, R. (2010). Review of the development of robotic manipulator for international space station. Chinese Journal of Space Science, 30(6), 612–619. https://doi.org/10.11728/cjss2010.06.612
   Google Scholar