首页> 外文会议>Human Factors and Ergonomics Society annual meeting >Comparing Physical and Virtual Simulation Use in UGV Research: Lessons Learned from HRI Research with Two Test Beds
【24h】

Comparing Physical and Virtual Simulation Use in UGV Research: Lessons Learned from HRI Research with Two Test Beds

机译:比较UGV研究中的物理和虚拟仿真使用:从HRI研究中获得的经验教训(带有两个测试台)

获取原文

摘要

This paper details lessons learned from human-robot interaction (HRI) research conducted with physicaland virtual unmanned vehicle (UV) test beds. Two subject matter experts (SMEs) were interviewedregarding their experiences using the test beds, and content was categorized to address validity issues andpractical concerns that researchers should consider when studying human operation of UVs. Interview datarevealed that from a practical standpoint, virtual simulation is favored over physical simulation. Virtualsimulation was also highlighted for permitting greater internal and construct validity than physicalsimulation. For tele-operation studies, however, physical simulation was identified as more externally validthan virtual simulation, but this advantage diminished for research at higher levels of autonomy. In general,this paper can serve as a resource for researchers who must choose between the two simulation methods.
机译:本文详细介绍了从物理上进行的人机交互(HRI)研究中获得的经验教训 和虚拟无人驾驶(UV)测试台。采访了两名主题专家(SMEs) 关于他们使用测试床的经历,并且对内容进行了分类,以解决有效性问题和 研究人员在研究紫外线的人为操作时应考虑的实际问题。面试数据 从实际的角度来看,虚拟仿真比物理仿真更受青睐。虚拟的 还强调了模拟,因为它允许内部和结构的有效性高于物理 模拟。但是,对于远程操作研究,物理模拟被认为在外部更有效 比虚拟仿真要好,但是对于更高级别的自主权而言,这种优势就减弱了。一般来说, 本文可以作为必须在两种模拟方法之间进行选择的研究人员的资源。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号