Beyond Cybathlon: On-demand Quadrupedal Assistance for People with Limited Mobility
Organizations: ETH Zurich, Robotic Systems Lab, Zurich, Switzerland.
Abstract
Background: Assistance robots have the potential to increase the independence of people who need daily care due to limited mobility or being wheelchair-bound. Current solutions of attaching robotic arms to motorized wheelchairs offer limited additional mobility at the cost of increased size and reduced wheelchair maneuverability. Methods: We present an on-demand quadrupedal assistance robot system controlled via a shared autonomy approach, which combines semi-autonomous task execution with human teleoperation. Due to the mobile nature of the system it can assist the operator whenever needed and perform autonomous tasks independently, without otherwise restricting their mobility. We automate pick-and-place tasks, as well as robot movement through the environment with semantic, collision-aware navigation. For teleoperation, we present a mouth-level joystick interface that enables an operator with reduced mobility to control the robot's end effector for precision manipulation. Results: We showcase our system in the Cybathlon 2024 Assistance Robot Race, and validate it in an at-home experimental setup, where we measure task completion times and user satisfaction. We find our system capable of assisting in a broad variety of tasks, including those that require dexterous manipulation. The user study confirms the intuition that increased robot autonomy alleviates the operator's mental load. Conclusions: We present a flexible system that has the potential to help people in wheelchairs maintain independence in everyday life by enabling them to solve mobile manipulation problems without external support. We achieve results comparable to previous state-of-the-art on subjective metrics while allowing for more autonomy of the operator and greater agility for manipulation.
Figures & tables
| Question Title | Verbal Question |
| Mental Demand | ”How mentally demanding was the task?” |
| Temporal Demand | ”How hurried or rushed was the pace of the task?” |
| Performance | ”How successful were you in accomplishing what you were asked to do?” |
| Effort | ”How hard did you have to work to accomplish your level of performance?” |
| Frustration | ”How insecure, discouraged, irritated, stressed, and/or annoyed were you?” |
| Ease of Use | ”How easy did it feel to complete the task?” |
| Question Title | 1 corresponds to: | 7 corresponds to: |
| Mental Demand | Not demanding at all | Extremely demanding |
| Temporal Demand | Not rushed at all | Extremely rushed |
| Performance | Fully successful | Complete Failure |
| Effort | Not hard at all | Extremely hard |
| Frustration | Not bothered at all | Extremely frustrated |
| Ease of Use | Extremely easy | Extremely hard |
| Task | (I) | (II) | (III) | (IV) | (V) | (VI) | (VII) | (VIII) | (IX) | (X) |
| EDAN | 0:52 | 0:40 | 0:41 | 0:54 | 0:47 | 0:18 | 1:24 | 1:37 | 0:32 | DNF |
| SmartArM | 0:34 | 0:51 | 0:53 | DNF | 0:53 | 0:19 | 1:54 | 2:06 | 0:28 | 1:45 |
| RSL (Official) | DNF | 1:08 | 0:42 | 0:42 | 1:31 | 0:19 | 1:40 | DNF | 0:59 | 1:11 |
| RSL (Custom) | DNF | 0:32 | 0:57 | 1:10 | 0:37 | 1:45 | 1:18 | DNF | 0:22 | 1:54 |
| BFH-FAIR | 0:48 | 0:46 | 0:48 | 0:55 | 1:04 | DNF | DNF | DNF | 1:03 | 1:26 |
| Scale Title | Pour Water Glass | Plug in Wheelchair |
| Completion Time (Mean) | 133s | 35s |
| Success Rate | 3/3 | 3/3 |
| Scale Title | Pour Water Glass | Plug In Wheelchair |
| Mental Demand | 4 | 4 |
| Temporal Demand | 2 | 2 |
| Performance | 1 | 1 |
| Effort | 3 | 5 |
| Frustration | 1 | 2 |
| Ease of Use | 2 | 1 |
| Scale Title | Fetch Snack | Fetch Drink | Throw Trash | Warm Up Food | Turn Off Lights |
| Task Completion Time (Mean) | 89s | 97s | 126s | 253s | 75s |
| Success Rate | 2/3 | 3/3 | 3/3 | 2/3 | 3/3 |
| Failure Reason (If Applicable) | Error in the goal calculation | - | - | Failure of the voice interface | - |
| Scale Title | Fetch Snack | Fetch Drink | Throw Trash | Warm Up Food | Turn Off Lights |
| Mental Demand | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 2 |
| Temporal Demand | 2 | 1 | 1 | 3 | 2 |
| Performance | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Effort | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Frustration | 3 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Ease of Use | 2 | 2 | 2 | 3 | 3 |
| Scale Title | HAT | Our System |
| Mental Demand | 2 | 2.2 |
| Temporal Demand | 1 | 1.8 |
| Performance | 1 | 1.0 |
| Effort | 2 | 2.0 |
| Frustration | 1 | 2.0 |
| Ease of Use | 2 | 2.4 |
Assistive Robotics
Assistive robotics develops robots and wearable devices that support mobility, daily activities, rehabilitation, and care.
See all 199 papersLocomotion Variability and User Experience in Smart Wheelchair Human-Robot Interaction
One Body, Two Minds: Variable Autonomy Approach for a Co-embodied Robotic Hand
mind'' and operates with variable autonomy levels. A learning-from-demonstration visuomotor diffusion policy enables autonomous grasping when the user positions the hand near known objects. Once grasped, the system signals completion and the human can actuate the grasped tool (drill, spray bottle, infrared thermometer, lighter, and ice-cream scoop) via hands-free head gestures. The human retains veto authority at all times through a release gesture that returns the system to the initial phase. Unlike blended autonomy, where control is continuously negotiated, our co-embodied approach consists of variable autonomy from full human control to full independent actions while maintaining physical coupling, realizing a one body, two minds paradigm. In a user study with 44 participants performing five bimanual tasks, users rapidly adapted to this two minds'' paradigm: completion times improved by 23.3% across trials (, Cohen's ), the best-performing policy variant reached a 93.6% task success rate, and acceptance ratings were high (5.70/7 overall impression, 5.52/7 daily use willingness). This work establishes co-embodiment with variable autonomy as a viable approach for assistive robotics, enabling human-robot collaboration through co-embodiment.