Robot Tele-Operation Mode Switching for Fault Intervention
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions
Solution Overview
Problem
Current tele-operation systems lack effective means to intervene when a robot's decisions or actions become undesirable, non-ideal, or insufficient, particularly in scenarios where AI or control paradigms are untrained or insufficiently trained.
Innovation Solution
A method and system that allow a robot to operate in multiple control modes, including a high autonomy mode and a lower autonomy mode that requires more explicit operator input, enabling switching between these modes based on fault conditions identified by the robot's sensors and processors, with the ability to output fault indications and receive operator input for corrective actions.
Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles
Engineering Contradiction Analysis
1Productivity
If the robot operates in high autonomy mode, then productivity is improved, but reliability deteriorates when AI or control paradigms are untrained or insufficiently trained
Solution Approach 1:
The system dynamically adjusts the level of autonomy based on operational conditions and fault detections. The robot can switch between high autonomy mode (for normal operations) and lower autonomy mode (when faults are detected or AI is insufficiently trained), allowing the autonomy level to be flexible and adaptive rather than fixed.
Solution Approach 2:
The system implements feedback mechanisms where fault conditions are continuously monitored and detected. When faults are identified, the system provides feedback to switch from high autonomy to lower autonomy mode, and can provide feedback to operators for intervention, creating a closed-loop control system that improves reliability based on operational performance.
2Ease of operation
If the robot operates in high autonomy mode, then ease of operation is improved, but the ability to intervene when decisions are undesirable deteriorates
Solution Approach 1:
The system allows dynamic switching between autonomy levels, enabling the robot to operate in high autonomy mode during normal conditions (improving ease of operation) while maintaining the capability to switch to lower autonomy modes when human intervention is needed (restoring adaptability).
Solution Approach 2:
The system introduces an intermediary fault detection and mode management layer that mediates between full autonomy and human intervention. This intermediary system monitors robot decisions and can trigger mode switches or alert operators, serving as a bridge that maintains ease of operation while enabling intervention when necessary.
3Reliability
If the robot switches to lower autonomy mode, then reliability is improved, but device complexity increases
Solution Approach 1:
The system segments the control architecture into distinct autonomy levels and modes, with clear boundaries and transition criteria. By dividing the control system into manageable segments (different autonomy levels), the complexity is organized and structured, making it easier to manage despite the presence of multiple modes.
Solution Approach 2:
The control system is designed with universal components that can operate across different autonomy levels. The fault detection mechanisms, communication interfaces, and basic control functions serve multiple purposes and remain consistent across autonomy levels, reducing overall complexity despite the multi-mode capability.
Data Source
AI summary
The present disclosure describes robots, tele-operation systems, methods, and computer program products where a robot is selectively operable in a plurality of control modes. Based on identification of a fault condition (when the robot fails to act in a suitable or sufficient manner), a control mode of the robot can be changed to provide a human operator with more explicit control over the robot. In this way, the fault condition can be resolved by human operator input, and the control modes, AI, or control paradigm for the robot can be trained to perform better in the future.