RoboAssist: Interactive Human-Humanoid Planning for Long-Horizon Surgical Assistance

Human-robot interaction (HRI) has long studied how agents and people coordinate to achieve shared goals. In this work, we formalize and benchmark the non-intrusive assistance as an independent paradigm of HRI, where a robot proactively supports a human's ongoing multi-step activities while strictly avoiding interruptions. Unlike conventional HRI tasks that rely on direct commands, explicit negotiation, or proactive interventions based on user habits and history, our task treats the human's plan as the primary process and formulates assistance as a joint decision over when to act and what to do. To systematically evaluate this problem, we establish a simulation benchmark, NIABench, along with new metrics tailored to the non-intrusive assistance task. We further propose a hybrid architecture that integrates an LLM with a scoring model. The scoring model first applies semantic retrieval to prune large candidate action sets, and then a ranker evaluates human-step and robot-action pairs, enabling reasoning over timing and cross-step dependencies. Comprehensive experiments on both NIABench and real-world scenarios demonstrate that our method achieves proactive, non-intrusive assistance that reduces human effort while preserving task effectiveness.

Robotic assistants in long-term human-robot collaboration need to assist users under partial observations while leveraging cross-day interaction history. However, human traits and routines are often unknown at the beginning of collaboration, making passive infer-then-act assistance ineffective and inefficient. To address this challenge, we study a cross-day proactive asking setting for continual task assistance and propose PACT (Proactive Asking for Continual Task Assistance), an ask-or-act framework that determines whether clarification should be sought before taking action. PACT leverages current observations together with accumulated interaction history to evaluate contextual sufficiency, enabling the robot to provide more reliable assistance and progressively adapt to the user over time. We implement its primary learned instantiation using reinforcement learning and evaluate alternative instantiations under the same framework. To assess such behavior, we further introduce a clarification utility metric that quantifies the trade-off between assistance accuracy and the frequency of clarification requests. Experiments in multi-day embodied collaboration scenarios demonstrate that, compared with passive inference baselines, PACT consistently improves both assistance accuracy and clarification utility, highlighting the importance of proactive asking in continual human-robot collaboration.

Embodied AI systems are increasingly expected to reason and act over extended horizons in physical environments. This growing capability brings safety to the foreground, because failures in the physical world can harm people, damage objects, and disrupt workplaces. Although safe embodied AI has attracted substantial attention, the literature remains fragmented across planning, policy design, and runtime execution. Long-horizon robotic manipulation is a particularly revealing anchor domain for this problem because semantic misgrounding, subtask-level error propagation, execution drift, and contact-rich physical risk can accumulate within the same closed-loop system. This survey therefore provides a structured review of safety in long-horizon robotic manipulation from an embodied AI perspective. We organize the literature by intervention locus, covering planning-time, policy-time, and execution-time safety, and we analyze the strength of the evidence that each line of work provides, distinguishing formal guarantees, statistical support, and empirical safety heuristics. This framework clarifies the distinct roles of backbone capability papers, direct safety mechanisms, and benchmark or evaluation studies, while exposing where current safety claims are well supported and where they remain indirect. We identify persistent gaps, including limited evidence for policy-time safety, weak formal support for contact-rich long-horizon manipulation, immature uncertainty-triggered intervention, and a shortage of manipulation-specific safety benchmarks. We conclude by outlining research directions for cross-layer assurance, evaluation design, and safer deployment of long-horizon robotic agents in real-world settings.