Task Location to Improve Human–Robot Cooperation: A Condition Number-Based Approach
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
In this manuscript, human-arm and the manipulator are modelled as a closed kinematic chai and established an approach to human-robot cooperation. he robot end-effector is guided by the human operator via an admittance controller to do a straight-line segment motion to complete the desired task. A comparative assessment is also presented with KUKA LWR robot.
Please include the state of the art literature on human-robot cooperation , please differentiate the cooperation, communication and collaboration.
Wang, Baicun, et al. "Intelligent welding system technologies: State-of-the-art review and perspectives." Journal of Manufacturing Systems 56 (2020): 373-391.
Inkulu, Anil Kumar, et al. "Challenges and opportunities in human robot collaboration context of Industry 4.0-a state of the art review." Industrial Robot: the international journal of robotics research and application 49.2 (2021): 226-239.
Pelase list the assumptions followed in the proposed approach.
Please do comparative assessment with refers to recent literature (from other authors)
List the assumption in modelling the Human arm.
Give the full form of the abbreviations at their first instance
Please elaborate the section 4.2 with more details on the optimization algorithm.
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Review of the article: “Task Location to Improve Human-Robot Cooperation:
A condition number based Approach”
The topic of this research and output might be useful for the Automation readers. The conducted work is worth to publish, however, during the review, I drew attention to the following shortcomings, the correction of which would improve the quality of the paper and I would also like to ask for clarification:
- The most important research results should be given in e.g. two sentences. This part of the data is missing in the Abstract.
- I propose in the Introduction section to add a description of the structure of the manuscript.
- The more details about KUKA LWR Robot and some photo of the real test stand should be given.
- A legends describing the color of the lines should be added to the figures from the Appendix A.
- The manuscript's bibliography is very extensive, but most items are at least 15 years old. I suggest considering enriching the literature with new items.
In general, I would like to thank the authors for the quality research and congratulate the authors on a well-prepared article. I recommend this article for publication after minor revision.
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
This paper proposed an approach to improve the performance in human-robot co-manipulation. The system of the human-arm grasping the robot handle is modelled as a closed kinematic chain (CKC)，and a task-based measure is formulated for this CKC by determining the minimum value of the CKC condition number along the path. This task-based measure is maximized to determine the suboptimal path location. The performance of the proposed method is validated by some experiments. I think the paper is written well with some significantly practical results. The proposed method seems directly effective for the engineering applications. However, I think the paper could be further improved by making some modifications, such as the theoretical expressions based on some mathematical equations should be addressed in detail. The stability of the controlled system should be considered under the current techniques. Then, the kinematics singular avoidance problem in the path location missions of the robotic manipulator should be addressed in theory. Moreover, the references should be refined so that the most important articles are reserved.
Author Response
Please see the attached file.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
The manuscript is well-revised, and no further comments.
Reviewer 3 Report
The paper has been revised well based on previous comments, and I have no further comment on the current version. I think the paper could be accepted now.
