In this chapter, we survey the current state of the art in space telerobots. We begin by defining relevant terms and describing applications. We then examine the design issues for space telerobotics, including common requirements, operational constraints, and design elements. A discussion follows of the reasons space telerobotics presents unique challenges beyond terrestrial systems. We then present case studies of several different space telerobots, examining key aspects of design and human–robot interaction. Next, we describe telerobots and concepts of operations for future space exploration missions. Finally, we discuss the various ways in which space telerobots can be evaluated in order to characterize and improve performance.
AbercrombyA.GernhardtM.LitakerH. (2012). Desert Research and Technology Studies (DRATS) 2009: A 14-day evaluation of the Space Exploration Vehicle prototype in a lunar analog environment (NASA Tech. Rep. TP-2012-217360). Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
2.
AkinD. (1986). Quantifying performance in space operations. In XXXVII Congress of the International Astronautical Federation (IAF 86-24). Paris, France: International Astronautical Federation.
3.
AmbroseR.WilcoB.ReedB.MatthiesL.LaveryD.KorsmeyerD. (2012). Robotics, telerobotics, and autonomous systems roadmap (April 2012). Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
4.
ArtigasJ.KremerP.PreuscheC.HirzingerG. (2006, October). Testbed for telepresent on-orbit satellite servicing. Paper presented at the Second International Workshop on Human-Centered Robotics Systems, Munich, Germany.
5.
AugustineN.AustinW.ChybaC.KennelC.BejmukB.CrawleyE.. . . RideS. (2009). Seeking a human spaceflight program worthy of a great nation. Review of U.S. Human Spaceflight Plans Committee. Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
6.
AzizS. (2010). Lessons learned from the STS-120/ISS 10A robotics operations. Acta Astronautica, 66, 157–165.
7.
BassD. (2005). Choosing Mars time: Analysis of the Mars exploration rover experience. In Proceedings of the IEEE Aerospace Conference (pp. 4174–4185). New York, NY: IEEE.
8.
BellJ. (2010). Seven years on Mars: Adventure, adversity, and achievements with the NASA Mars Exploration Rovers Spirit and Opportunity. In Proceedings of the American Geophysical Union Fall Meeting (p. 10). Washington, DC: American Geophysical Union.
9.
BluethmannW.AmbroseR.DiftlerM.AskewS.HuberE.GozaM.. . . MagruderD. (2003). Robonaut: A robot designed to work with humans in space. Autonomous Robots, 14, 179–197.
10.
BowdenM.AkinD. (1979). Underwater simulation of human dynamics and productivities in extra-vehicular assembly. In Proceedings of the XXVIII Congress of the International Astronautical Federation (IAF 79-109). Paris, France: International Astronautical Federation.
11.
BresinaJ.JonssonA.MorrisP.RajanK. (2005). Activity planning for the Mars Exploration Rovers. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Automated Planning and Scheduling (pp. 40–49). Palo Alto, CA: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.
12.
BridgwaterL.AmbroseR.DiftlerM.ValvoM.RadfordN.GozaM.StrawserP. (2006). Symbiotic robots for space based construction and maintenance. In AIAA Space 2006 Conference and Exposition (pp. 1–7). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
13.
BualatM.AbercrombyA.AllanM.BouyssounouseX.DeansM.FongT.. . . UtzH. (2011). Robotic recon for human exploration: Method, assessment, and lessons learned. In GarryW.BleacherJ. (Eds.), Analogs for planetary exploration (Special Paper 483, pp. 117–135). Boulder, CO: Geologic Society of America.
14.
BualatM.DeansM.FongT.ProvencherC.SchreckenghostD.SmithE. (2012). ISS crew control of surface telerobotics. In IAF/AIAA Global Space Exploration Conference (GLEX-2012.01.2.712188). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
15.
BualatM.FongT.AllanM.BouyssounouseX.CohenT.FluckigerL.. . . WheelerD. (2013). Surface telerobotics: Development and testing of a crew controlled planetary rover system. In AIAA Space 2013 Conference and Exposition (AIAA 2013-5475, pp. 1–10). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
16.
BurnsJ.KringD.NorrisS.HopkinsJ.LazioJ.KasperJ. (2012). A lunar L2-farside exploration and science mission concept with the Orion multi-purpose crew vehicle and a teleoperated lander/rover. In IAF/AIAA Global Space Exploration Conference (GLEX-2012.04.2.312193). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
17.
BurridgeR.GrahamJ.ShillcuttK.HirshR.KortenkampD. (2003, May). Experiments with an EVA assistant robot. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics, and Automation in Space, Nara, Japan.
18.
BurridgeR.HambuchenK. (2009). Using prediction to enhance remote robot supervision across time delay. In Proceedings of the IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (pp. 5628–5634). New York, NY: IEEE.
19.
CareyW.SchoonejansP.HufenbachB.NergaardK.Bosquillon de FreschevilleF.GrenouilleauJ.SchieleA. (2012). METERON: A mission concept proposal for preparation of human-robotic exploration. In 1st IAF/AIAA Global Space Exploration Conference (GLEX-2012.01.2.6.12697). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
20.
CastanoR.EstlinT.AndersonR.GainesD.CastanoA. (2007). OASIS: Onboard Autonomous Science Investigation System for opportunistic rover science. Journal of Field Robotics, 24, 379–397.
21.
ChintamaniK.CaoA.EllisR. D.PandyaA. K. (2010). Improved tele-manipulator navigation during display-control misalignments using augmented reality cues. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A, 40, 29–39.
22.
ChintamaniK.CaoA.EllisR.TanC.PandyaA. (2011). An analysis of teleoperator performance in conditions of display-control misalignments with and without movement cues. Journal of Cognitive Engineering and Decision Making, 5, 139–155.
23.
ClanceyW.SierhuisM.AlenaR.BerriosD.DowdingJ.GrahamJ.. . . RupertS. (2005). Automating CapCom using mobile agents and robotic assistants. In AIAA First Space Exploration Conference: Continuing the Voyage of Discovery (AIAA 2005-2659, pp. 1–40). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
24.
CooperG.HarperR.Jr. (1969). The use of pilot rating in the evaluation of aircraft handling qualities (NASA TN D-5153). Washington, DC: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
25.
DeansM.FongT.AllanM.BouyssounouseX.BualatM.Flueckiger. . . UtzH. (2009). Robotic scouting for human exploration. In AIAA Space 2009 Conference and Exposition (AIAA-2009-6781, pp. 1–15). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
26.
DeansM.FongT.BualatM.HeggyE.HelperM.HodgesK.. . . ZacnyK. (2012). Using robots before and after humans to improve space exploration. In IAF/AIAA Global Space Exploration Conference (GLEX-2012.04.1.512344). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
27.
DiftlerM.MehlingJ.AbdallahM.RadfordN.BridgwaterL.SandersA.. . . AmbroseR. (2011). Robonaut 2: The first humanoid in space. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 2178–2183). New York, NY: IEEE.
28.
DiftlerM.OggettW.MehlingJ.KingB. (2006). Reconfiguration of EVA modular truss assemblies using an anthropomorphic robot. In Proceedings of the Space Technologies and Applications International Forum (p. 992). Albuquerque, NM: AIP.
29.
DupuisE.LangloisP.BedwaniJ.-L.GingrasD.SalernoA.AllardP.. . . LamarcheT. (2010, August/September). The Avatar-EXPLORE experiments: Results and lessons learned. Paper presented at the International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics, and Automation in Space, Sapporo, Japan.
30.
EstlinT.BornsteinB.GainesD.AndersonR.ThompsonD.BurlM.. . . JuddM. (2012). AEGIS automated science targeting for the MER Opportunity Rover. ACM Transactions on Intelligent Systems and Technology, 3(3), 50.
31.
EzerN.ZumbadoJ. R.SandorA.BoyerJ. (2011). Development of methodologies, metrics, and tools for investigating human–robot interaction in space robotics. In Proceedings of the Fourth IEEE International Conference on Space Mission Challenges for Information Technology. New York, NY: IEEE.
32.
FerketicJ.GoldblattL.HodgsonE.MurrayS.WichowskiR.BradleyA.. . . StilesR. (2006a). Toward human–robot interface standards I: Use of standardization and intelligent subsystems for advancing human–robotic competency in space exploration. In Proceedings of the SAE 36th International Conference on Environmental Systems (SAE 2006-01-2019). Norfolk, VA: SAE.
33.
FerketicJ.GoldblattL.HodgsonE.MurrayS.WichowskiR.BradleyA.. . . ErkorkmazC. (2006b). Toward human–robot interface standards II: A closer examination of common elements in human-robot interactions across the space enterprise. In Proceedings of the 2006 AIAA Space Conference (AIAA-2006-7388). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
34.
FongT.AbercrombyA.BualatM.DeansM.HodgesK.HurtadoJ.Jr. . . SchreckenghostD. (2010). Assessment of robotic recon for human exploration of the Moon. Acta Astronautica, 67, 1176–1188.
35.
FongT.BualatM.DeansM.AdamsB.AllanM.AltobelliM.. . . YoungK. (2010). Robotic follow-up for human exploration. In Proceedings of the 2010 AIAA Space Conference (AIAA-2010-8605). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
36.
FongT.BualatM.DeansM.AllanM.BouyssounouseX.BrotonM.. . . UtzH. (2008). Field testing of utility robots for lunar surface operations. In Proceedings of the 2008 AIAA Space Conference (AIAA-2008-7886). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
37.
FongT.NourbakhshI. (2005). Interaction challenges in human–robot space exploration. ACM Interactions, 12(2), 42–45.
38.
FongT.NourbakhshI.KunzC.FluckigerL.SchreinerJ.AmbroseR.. . . ScholtzJ. (2005). The Peer-to-Peer Human–Robot Interaction project. In Proceedings of the 2005 AIAA Space Conference (AIAA-2005-6750). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
39.
FongT.ProvencherC.MicireM.DiftlerM.BerkaR.BluethmannB.MittmanD. (2012, March). The Human Exploration Telerobotics project: Objectives, approach, and testing. Paper presented at the IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT.
40.
FowlerS. (1998). GUI design handbook. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
41.
FrancisR.MooresJ.OsinskiG. (2012). A mission control architecture for joint human and robotic lunar exploration missions, as tested in terrestrial analogue missions. In Proceedings of the IAF/AIAA Global Space Exploration Conference (GLEX-2012.04.1.612294). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
42.
GarryW.BleacherJ. (Eds.). (2011). Analogs for planetary exploration (Special Paper 483). Boulder, CO: Geological Society of America.
43.
GarryW.HörzF.LofgrenG.KringD.ChapmanM.EpplerD.. . . WalheimR. (2008). Science operations for the 2008 NASA lunar analog field test at Black Point lava flow, Arizona. In Proceedings of the 40th Lunar and Planetary Science Conference. The Woodlands, TX: LPSC.
44.
GonthierY.AmbroseR.JeffriesS.RobinsA.SchultzJ.UenoH. (2012). A human–robotic partnership assessment for the global exploration strategy. In Proceedings of the IAF/AIAA Global Space Exploration Conference (GLEX-2012.D1.2.812672). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
45.
GozaM.AmbroseR.DiftlerM.SpainI. (2004). Telepresence control of the NASA/DARPA Robonaut on a mobility platform. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 623–629). New York, NY: ACM.
46.
GrotzingerJ.CrispJ.VasavadaA.AndersonR.BakerC.BarryR.. . . WiensR. (2012). Mars Science Laboratory mission and science investigation. Space Science Reviews, 170, 5–56.
47.
GugertyL.BrooksJ. (2001). Seeing where you are heading: Integrating environmental and egocentric reference frames in cardinal direction judgments. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 7, 251–266.
48.
GugertyL.BrooksJ. (2004). Reference-frame misalignment and cardinal direction judgments: Group differences and strategies. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Applied, 10, 75–88.
49.
HambuchenK.BluethmannW.GozaM.AmbroseR.RabeK.AllanM. (2006). Supervising remote humanoids across intermediate time delay. In Proceedings of the IEEE-RAS International Conference on Humanoid Robots (pp. 246–251). New York, NY: IEEE.
50.
HambuchenK.BurridgeR.AmbroseR.BluethmannW.DiftlerM.RadfordN. (2012). Forming human-robot teams across time and space. In Proceedings of the IAF/AIAA Global Space Exploration Conference (GLEX-2012.04.2.5). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
51.
HartS.StavelandL. (1988). Development of NASA-TLX (Task Load Index): Results of empirical and theoretical research. In HancockP.MeshkatiN. (Eds.), Human mental workload (pp. 139–183). New York, NY: Elsevier.
52.
HartmanF.CooperB.MaxwellS.WrightJ.YenJ. (2010). A commanding and visualization software suite for controlling the Mars rovers and other planetary robots. Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence and Intelligent Infomatics, 14, 4–12.
53.
Hashtrudi-ZaadK.SalcudeanS. E. (2002). Transparency in time-delayed systems and the effect of local force feedback for transparent teleoperation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 18, 108–114.
54.
HayatiS.LeeT.TsoK.BackesP.LloydJ. (2002). A testbed for a unified teleoperated-autonomous dual-arm robotic system. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 1090–1095). New York, NY: IEEE.
55.
HelmickD.AngelovaA.MatthiesL. (2009). Terrain adaptive navigation for planetary rovers. Journal of Field Robotics, 26(4), 391–410.
56.
HirshR.GrahamJ.RochlisJ. (2006). Human assistant planetary exploration robots. In Proceedings of the Earth and Space (pp. 1–8). Houston, TX: ASCE.
57.
HirzingerG.BrunnerB.DietrichJ.HeindlJ. (1994). ROTEX: The first remotely controlled robot in space. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 2604–2611). New York, NY: IEEE.
58.
HodgesK.SchmittH. (2011). A new paradigm for advanced planetary analog exploration exercises on Earth. In GarryW.BleacherJ. (Eds.), Analogs for planetary exploration (Special Paper 483, pp. 17–31). Boulder, CO: Geologic Society of America.
59.
HopkinsJ. (2012). Early telerobotic exploration of the lunar far side using Orion spacecraft at Earth-Moon L2. In Proceedings of the IAF/AIAA Global Space Exploration Conference (GLEX-2012.02.3.212595). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
60.
HunterD.DarlingtonT.KrukewichK.LaurenzioD. (1993, October). Design and operation of the Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM): Advancing the state of the art in space manipulator systems. Paper presented at the 44th Congress of the International Astronautical Federation, Graz, Austria.
61.
HurtadoJ.JrYoungK.BleacherJ.GarryW.RiceJ.Jr (2011). Field geologic observation and sample collection strategies for planetary surface exploration: Insights from the 2010 Desert RATS geologist crewmembers. Acta Astronautica, 90, 344–355.
62.
ISS Program. (1991). Hand controller commonality test report (JSC 32125, Vols. 1–5). Houston, TX: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
63.
ISS Program. (2007). Software requirements specification for Mobile Servicing Systems (MSS) graphical user interface (GUI): Vol. 3. Special Purpose Dexterous Manipulator (SPDM) (SSP 50337-03, Rev B). Houston, TX: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
64.
ISS Program. (2008). Display and graphics commonality standard (SSP 50313, Rev D). Houston, TX: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
65.
JonesP.FiedlerE. (2010). Human performance in space. Reviews of Human Factors and Ergonomics, 6, 172–197.
66.
KaberD. B.OnalE.EndsleyM. R. (2000). Design of automation for telerobots and the effect on performance, operator situation awareness and subjective workload. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing, 10, 409–430.
67.
KermurdjianA.GromovV.KazhukaloI.KozlovG.KomissarovV.. . . MishkinyukV. (1993). Soviet developments of planetary rovers in period of 1964–1990. In MouraD. (Ed.), Missions, technologies and design of planetary mobile vehicles (pp. 25–43). Toulouse, France: Cepadues.
68.
KimW. S.BejczyA. K. (1993). Demonstration of a high-fidelity predictive/preview display technique for telerobotic servicing in space. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 9, 698–702.
69.
KleinM.WarmJ.RileyM.MatthewsG.GaitondeK.DonovanJ. (2008). Perceptual distortions produce multidimensional stress profiles in novice users of an endoscopic surgery simulator. Human Factors, 50, 291–300.
70.
LambP.OwenD. (2005). Human performance in space telerobotic manipulation. In ACM Virtual Reality Software and Technology (pp. 31–37). New York, NY: ACM.
71.
LeeS.LeesD.CohenT.AllanM.DeansM.MorseT.. . . SmithT. (2011). Reusable science tools for analog exploration missions: GDS Web Tools, VERVE, and Gigapan Voyage. Acta Astronautica, 90, 268–288.
72.
LegerP.Trebi-OllennuA.WrightJ.MawellS.BonitzR.BiesiadeckiJ.. . . MaimoneM. (2005). Mars Exploration Rover surface operations: Driving Spirit at Gusev Crater. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (Vol. 2, pp. 1815–1822). New York, NY: IEEE.
73.
LesterD.ThronsonH. (2011). Low-latency lunar surface telerobotics from Earth–moon libration points. In Proceedings of the 2011 AIAA Space Conference (AIAA-2011-7341). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
74.
LesterD.HodgesK.OwerC.KlausK. (2012). Exploration telepresence from Earth–moon Lagrange points. In Proceedings of the IAF/AIAA Global Space Exploration Conference (GLEX-2012.04.2.112250). Reston, VA: American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.
75.
MacedoJ.KaberD.EndsleyM.PowanusornP.MyungS. (1998). The effect of automated compensation for incongruent axes on teleoperator performance. Human Factors, 40, 541–553.
76.
MaidaJ.BowenC.PaceJ. (2007). Improving robotic operator performance using augmented reality. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 51st Annual Meeting (pp. 1635–1639). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
77.
McGregorR.OshinowoL. (2001, June). Flight 6A: Deployment and checkout of the Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS). Paper presented at the 6th International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space, Quebec, Canada.
78.
Menchaca-BrandanM.LiuA.OmanC.NatapoffA. (2007). Influence of perspective-taking and mental rotation abilities in space teleoperation. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (pp. 271–278). New York, NY: ACM.
79.
MirmalekZ. (2008). Working time on Mars. KronoScope, 8, 159–178.
80.
MishkinA.LaubachS. (2006, June). From prime to extended mission: Evolution of the MER tactical uplink process. Paper presented at the 9th International Conference on Space Operations, Rome, Italy.
81.
MishkinA.LeeY.KorthD.LeBlancT. (2007, March). Human–robotic missions to the moon and Mars: Operations design implications. Paper presented at the IEEE Aerospace Conference, Big Sky, MT.
82.
MishkinA.LimonadiD.LaubachS.BassD. (2006). Working the Martian night shift: The MER surface operations process. IEEE Robotics and Automation Magazine, 13(2), 46–53.
83.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration. (2011). Mars Science Laboratory launch [Press kit]. Washington, DC: Author.
84.
NiculescuS.TaoutaouD.LozanoR. (2003). Bilateral teleoperation with communications delay. International Journal of Robust and Nonlinear Control, 13, 873–883.
85.
NielsenC.GoodrichM.RicksR. (2007). Ecological interfaces for improving mobile robot teleoperation. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 23, 927–941.
86.
NiemeyerG.SlotineJ. E. (2004). Telemanipulation with time delays. International Journal of Robotics Research, 23, 873–890.
87.
NorrisJ.PowellM.VonaM.BackesP.WickJ. (2005). Mars Exploration Rover operations with the science activity planner. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Robotics and Automation (pp. 4618–4623). New York, NY: IEEE.
88.
OlesonS.LandisG.McGuireM.SchmidtG. (2011). HERRO mission to Mars using telerobotic surface exploration from orbit. Journal of the British Interplanetary Society, 64, 304–313.
89.
ParkeB.MishkinA. (2005). Best practices in shift handover communication: Mars Exploration Rover surface operations. In Proceedings of the International Association for the Advancement of Space Safety Conference (pp. 25–27). Nice, France: ESA.
90.
PiedboeufJ.DupuisÉ. (2003). Recent Canadian activities in space automation and robotics-an overview. In Proceedings of the 7th International Symposium on Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation in Space (pp. 19–23). Montreal, Canada: iSAIRAS.
91.
ReevesG.SnyderJ. (2005). An overview of the Mars Exploration Rovers flight software. In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics (Vol. 1 pp. 1–7). New York, NY: IEEE.
92.
RehnmarkF.BluethmannW.RochlisJ.HuberE.AmbroseR. (2003). An effective division of labor between human and robotic agents performing a cooperative assembly task. In Proceedings of Humanoids (n.p.). New York, NY: IEEE.
93.
RehnmarkF.CurrieN.AmbroseR.CulbertC. (2004). Human-robot teaming in a multi-agent space assembly task. In Proceedings of the World Automation Congress (pp. 69–74). Albuquerque, NM: TSI Press.
94.
RembalaR.AzizS. (2007). Increasing the utilization of the ISS Mobile Servicing System through ground control. Acta Astronautica, 61, 691–698.
95.
RembalaR.OwerC. (2009). Robotic assembly and maintenance of future space stations based on the ISS mission operations experience. Acta Astronautica, 65, 912–920.
RossA.KosmoJ.JanoikoB. (2012). Historical synopses of Desert RATS 1997–2010 and a preview of Desert RATS 2011. Acta Astronautica, 90, 182–202.
98.
SachdevS. (1986). Canadarm: A review of its flights. Journal of Vacuum Science and Technology, 4, 268–272.
99.
SchreckenghostD.MilamT.FongT. (2010). Measuring performance in real-time during remote human–robot operations with adjustable autonomy. IEEE Intelligent Systems, 2010, 36–45.
100.
ShawJ.SalehJ.HoffmanJ. (2007). Review and synthesis of considerations in architecting heterogeneous teams of humans and robots for optimal space exploration. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C: Applications and Reviews, 37, 779–793.
101.
SheridanT. (1993). Space teleoperation through time delay: Review and prognosis. IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation, 9, 592–606.
102.
SheridanT. (1995). Teleoperation, telerobotics and telepresence: A progress report. Control Engineering Practice, 3, 204–214.
103.
ShillcuttK.BurridgeR.GrahamJ. (2002). Boudreau the Robot (a.k.a. EVA Robotic Assistant). (AAAI Tech. Rep. FS-02-03). Menlo Park, CA: Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence.
104.
ShirleyD.MatijevicJ. (1995). Mars Pathfinder microrover. Autonomous Robots, 2, 283–289.
105.
SingerS. (2012). Creating an objective methodology for human–robot team configuration selection (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Maryland, College Park.
106.
SteinfeldA.FongT.KaberD.LewisM.ScholtzJ.SchultzA.GoodrichM. (2006). Common metrics for human–robot interaction. In Proceedings of the ACM Conference on Human–Robot Interaction (pp. 33–40). New York, NY: ACM.
107.
StuartM. A.JensenD. G.BierschwaleJ. M.WilmingtonR. P.AdamS. C.DiazM. F. (1990). Hand controller commonality evaluation process. In Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 34th Annual Meeting (pp. 121–125). Santa Monica, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society.
108.
UchiyamaM.KonnoA.UchiyamaT.KandaS. (2002). Development of a flexible dual-arm manipulator testbed for space robotics. In Proceedings of the IEEE International Workshop on Intelligent Robots and Systems (pp. 375–381). New York, NY: IEEE.
109.
VertesiJ. (2012). Seeing like a rover: Visualization, embodiment, and interaction on the Mars Exploration Rover mission. Social Studies of Science, 42, 393–414.
110.
WelchR.HooverM.SouthwardE. (2009). Cognitive performance during prismatic displacement as a partial analogue of space fog. Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine, 80, 771–780.
111.
WhitmoreM.StealeyS.WilmingtonR. (1991). Space station hand controller commonality test report (JSC 32125/LESC 29020). Houston, TX: NASA Johnson Space Center.
112.
WickensC.CarswellM. (2012). Information processing. In SalvendyG. (Ed.), Handbook of human factors and ergonomics (4th ed., pp. 117–161). New York, NY: Wiley.
