REFERENCES
1. Niemeyer, G.; Preusche, C.; Stramigioli, S.; Lee, D. Telerobotics. In: Springer handbook of robotics; 2016, pp. 1085-108.
2. Hokayem, P. F.; Spong, M. W. Bilateral teleoperation: an historical survey. Automatica 2006, 42, 2035-57.
3. Artigas, J.; Balachandran, R.; De Stefano, M.; et al. Teleoperation for on-orbit servicing missions through the astra geostationary satellite. In 2016 IEEE aerospace conference. Big Sky, MT, USA; 5-12 March 2016, pp. 1-12.
4. Kennedy, B. R. C.; Cantwell, K.; Malik, M.; et al. The unknown and the unexplored: insights into the Pacific deep-sea following NOAA CAPSTONE expeditions. Front. Mar. Sci. 2019, 6, 480.
5. Nagatani, K.; Kiribayashi, S.; Okada, Y.; et al. Emergency response to the nuclear accident at the fukushima daiichi nuclear power plants using mobile rescue robots. J. Field. Rob. 2013, 30, 44-63.
6. Le, D. T.; Sutjipto, S.; Nguyen, D. D. K.; Paul, G. Design, integration, and field testing of a digital twin-based teleoperated rock scaling robot. IEEE. Trans. Field. Robot. 2025, 2, 188-207.
7. Balachandran, R.; Ryu, J.; Jorda, M.; Ott, C.; Albu-Schaeffer, A. Closing the force loop to enhance transparency in time-delayed teleoperation. In 2020 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). Paris, France; May 31-August 31 2020, pp. 10198-204.
8. Chakraborty, N.; Fang, Y.; Schreiber, A.; et al. Towards real-time generation of delay-compensated video feeds for outdoor mobile robot teleoperation. In 2025 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). Atlanta, GA, USA; May 19-23, 2025, pp. 1097-104.
9. Wang, C.; Luo, R.; Whitney, J. P.; Padir, T. Practical approaches towards transparent and stable bilateral teleoperation under time-varying network delay. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 2024, 17, 409-26.
10. Neumeier, S.; Wintersberger, P.; Frison, A.; Becher, A.; Facchi, C.; Riener, A. Teleoperation: the holy grail to solve problems of automated driving? Sure, but latency matters. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications. Utrecht, Netherlands; 21-25 September 2019, pp. 186-97.
11. Kamtam, S. B.; Lu, Q.; Bouali, F.; Haas, O. C. L.; Birrell, S. Network latency in teleoperation of connected and autonomous vehicles: a review of trends, challenges, and mitigation strategies. Sensors 2024, 24, 3957.
12. Abi-Farraj, F.; Pacchierotti, C.; Arenz, O.; Neumann, G.; Giordano, P. R. A Haptic shared-control architecture for guided multi-target robotic grasping. IEEE. Trans. Haptics. 2020, 13, 270-85.
13. Ju, C.; Son, H. I. Human-centered evaluation of shared teleoperation system for maintenance and repair tasks in nuclear power plants. Int. J. Control. Autom. Syst. 2022, 20, 3418-32.
14. Huang, F.; Li, W.; Wang, Y.; Mei, D.; Chen, Z. A shared control framework with constrained optimization and guiding force feedback for teleoperation of underwater electric manipulator. IEEE. J. Ocean. Eng. 2025, 50, 1030-44.
15. Bavelos, A. C.; Anastasiou, E.; Dimitropoulos, N.; Michalos, G.; Makris, S. Virtual reality-based dynamic scene recreation and robot teleoperation for hazardous environments. Comput. Aided. Civ. Infrastruct. Eng. 2025, 40, 392-408.
16. Shakoorianfard, M.; Waurich, V.; Richter, C.; Will, F. A digitalization-based approach for dismantling a cooling tower using a remotely controlled demolition excavator. Constr. Robot. 2025, 9, 9.
17. Sun, D.; Naghdy, F.; Du, H. A novel approach for stability and transparency control of nonlinear bilateral teleoperation system with time delays. Control. Eng. Pract. 2016, 47, 15-27.
18. Black, D. G.; Salcudean, S. E. Stability and transparency in mixed-reality bilateral human teleoperation. IEEE. Trans. Robot. 2025, 41, 5800-15.
19. Xu, X.; Cizmeci, B.; Schuwerk, C.; Steinbach, E. Model-mediated teleoperation: toward stable and transparent teleoperation systems. IEEE. Access. 2016, 4, 425-49.
20. Li, Y.; Sena, A.; Wang, Z.; et al. A review on interaction control for contact robots through intent detection. Prog. Biomed. Eng. 2022, 4, 032004.
21. Khedr, M.; Le, Q. D.; Yang, E. Teleoperation control for robotic systems in hazardous environments: overview and challenges. In 2025 30th International Conference on Automation and Computing (ICAC). Loughborough, United Kingdom; 27-29 August 2025, pp. 1-6.
22. Tsunoori, T.; Kobayashi, M.; Uranishi, Y. Bi-AQUA: bilateral control-based imitation learning for underwater robot arms via lighting-aware action chunking with transformers. arXiv 2025, arXiv:251116050.
23. Moniruzzaman, M.; Rassau, A.; Chai, D.; Islam, S. M. S. High latency unmanned ground vehicle teleoperation enhancement by presentation of estimated future through video transformation. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 2022, 106, 48.
24. Sun, P.; Li, W.; Li, J.; et al. More precise and faster: dual-scale teleoperation for manipulator in large workspace. IEEE. Trans. Fuzzy. Syst. 2026, 34, 27-40.
25. Zhu, Y.; Fusano, K.; Aoyama, T.; Hasegawa, Y. Intention-reflected predictive display for operability improvement of time-delayed teleoperation system. Robomech. J. 2023, 10, 17.
26. Gentile, C.; Lunghi, G.; Buonocore, L. R.; et al. Manipulation tasks in hazardous environments using a teleoperated robot: a case study at cern. Sensors 2023, 23, 1979.
27. Li, Y.; Liu, S.; Wang, M.; Li, S.; Tan, J. Teleoperation-driven and keyframe-based generalizable imitation learning for construction robots. J. Comput. Civ. Eng. 2024, 38, 04024031.
28. Khedr, M.; Yang, E. A modular teleoperation system for reliable and safer robotic manipulation with integrated force and visual feedback. In 2025 30th International Conference on Automation and Computing (ICAC). Loughborough, United Kingdom; 27-29 August 2025, pp. 1-6.
29. Huang, F.; Yang, X.; Mei, D.; Chen, Z. Unified contact model and hybrid motion/force control for teleoperated manipulation in unknown environments. IEEE/ASME. Trans. Mechatron. 2025, 30, 921-32.
30. Wang, M.; Chen, K.; Wang, P.; Song, Y.; Sun, T. Teleoperation mode and control strategy for the machining of large casting parts. Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 2024, 86, 102690.
31. Correa, M.; Cardenas, D.; Carvajal, D.; Ruiz-Del-Solar, J. Haptic teleoperation of impact hammers in underground mining. Appl. Sci. 2022, 12, 1428.
32. Zhang, J.; Zhang, X.; Cheng, Y.; Cheng, Y.; Zhang, Q.; Lu, K. Nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) based shared autonomy for bilateral teleoperation in CFETR remote handling. Nucl. Eng. Technol. 2024, 56, 4437-45.
33. Li, X.; Kazanzides, P. Task frame estimation during model-based teleoperation for satellite servicing. In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). Stockholm, Sweden; 16-21 May 2016, pp. 2834-39.
34. Anderson, R.; Spong, M. Bilateral control of teleoperators with time delay. In Proceedings of the 1988 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. Beijing, China; 8-12 August 1988, pp. 131-38.
35. Hu, H.; Liu, Y. Passivity-based control framework for task-space bilateral teleoperation with parametric uncertainty over unreliable networks. ISA. Trans. 2017, 70, 187-99.
36. Kostyukova, O.; Vista, F. P.; Chong, K. T. Design of feedforward and feedback position control for passive bilateral teleoperation with delays. ISA. Trans. 2019, 85, 200-13.
37. Piccinelli, N.; Muradore, R. Linearized virtual energy tank for passivity-based bilateral teleoperation using linear MPC. IEEE. Trans. Robot. 2025, 41, 2589-604.
38. Nuño, E.; Basañez, L.; Ortega, R. Passivity-based control for bilateral teleoperation: a tutorial. Automatica 2011, 47, 485-95.
39. Nuño, E.; Basañez, L.; Ortega, R.; Spong, M. W. Position tracking for non-linear teleoperators with variable time delay. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2009, 28, 895-910.
40. Namerikawa, T.; Kawada, H. Symmetric impedance matched teleoperation with position tracking. In Proceedings of the 45th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control. San Diego, CA, USA; 13-15 December 2006, pp. 4496-501.
41. Hashtrudi-Zaad, K.; Salcudean, S. E. Analysis of control architectures for teleoperation systems with impedance/admittance master and slave manipulators. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2001, 20, 419-45.
42. Lee, D.; Spong, M. Passive bilateral teleoperation with constant time delay. IEEE. Trans. Robot. 2006, 22, 269-81.
43. Ortega, R.; Spong, M. W. Adaptive motion control of rigid robots: a tutorial. Automatica 1989, 25, 877-88.
44. Nuño, E.; Ortega, R.; Basañez, L. An adaptive controller for nonlinear teleoperators. Automatica 2010, 46, 155-9.
45. Nichols, K. A.; Okamura, A. M. A framework for multilateral manipulation in surgical tasks. IEEE. Trans. Autom. Sci. Eng. 2016, 13, 68-77.
46. Shahbazi, M.; Atashzar, S. F.; Patel, R. V. A systematic review of multilateral teleoperation systems. IEEE. Trans. Haptics. 2018, 11, 338-56.
47. Chen, Z.; Huang, F.; Song, W.; Zhu, S. A novel wave-variable based time-delay compensated four-channel control design for multilateral teleoperation system. IEEE. Access. 2018, 6, 25506-16.
48. Jiang, H.; Yang, Y.; Feng, X.; Hua, C.; Li, J. Prescribed-time cooperative control of multilateral teleoperation systems: a novel composite fuzzy learning-based approach. IEEE. Trans. Fuzzy. Syst. 2025, 33, 3695-706.
49. Pérez-Alvarado, M. E.; Gómez-Espinosa, A.; González-García, J.; García-Valdovinos, L. G.; Salgado-Jiménez, T. Convolutional long short-term memory predictor for collaborative remotely operated vehicle trajectory tracking in a leader-follower formation subject to communication and sensor latency in the presence of external disturbances. Machines 2024, 12, 691.
50. Patel, S.; Abdellatif, F.; Alsheikh, M.; et al. Multi-robot system for inspection of underwater pipelines in shallow waters. Int. J. Intell. Robot. Appl. 2024, 8, 14-38.
51. Srikar, A.; Vijay Kumar, P.; Thondiyath, A. Enhancement of stability and transparency in teleoperated robots through isotropy-based design. IEEE. Access. 2020, 8, 17273-86.
52. Wu, K.; Chen, H.; Li, L.; Liu, Z.; Chang, H. Position prediction for space teleoperation with SAO-CNN-BiGRU-attention algorithm. IEEE. Robot. Autom. Lett. 2024, 9, 11674-81.
53. Chen, H.; Liu, Z.; Huang, P.; Kuang, Z. Time-delay modeling and simulation for relay communication-based space telerobot system. IEEE. Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. Syst. 2022, 52, 4211-22.
54. Yoon, K.; Ko, D.; Lim, S. Real-time video prediction using gans with guidance information for time-delayed robot teleoperation. Int. J. Control. Autom. Syst. 2023, 21, 2387-97.
55. Qu, X.; Su, J.; Liu, C.; Hu, J.; Chen, G.; Han, F. Occlusion-aware trajectory prediction for time-delayed teleoperation of space manipulators. Acta. Astronaut. 2025, 237, 188-95.
56. Farr, N.; Bowen, A.; Ware, J.; Pontbriand, C.; Tivey, M. An integrated, underwater optical/acoustic communications system. In OCEANS'10 IEEE SYDNEY. Sydney, NSW, Australia; 24-27 May 2010. pp. 1-6.
57. Durugwar, R.; Kasturiwala, S. Peer to peer (P2P) IR optical communication used for underwater or open-air medium. Nanotechnol. Percept. 2024, 643-55.
58. Zhang, H.; Gao, Y.; Tong, Z.; et al. Omnidirectional optical communication system designed for underwater swarm robotics. Opt. Express. 2023, 31, 18630-44.
59. Wang, X.; Zhang, M.; Zhou, H.; Ren, X. Performance analysis and design considerations of the shallow underwater optical wireless communication system with solar noises utilizing a photon tracing-based simulation platform. Electronics 2021, 10, 632.
60. Narmeen, R.; Ahmad, I.; Kaleem, Z.; Mughal, U. A.; Da Costa, D. B.; Muhaidat, S. Shortest propagation delay-based relay selection for underwater acoustic sensor networks. IEEE. Access. 2021, 9, 37923-35.
61. Hashimoto, T.; Tazaki, Y.; Matsuda, F.; et al. Experimental evaluation of manipulator teleoperation system based on trajectory planning for obstacle removal task in nuclear plant decommissioning. J. Robot. Mechatron. 2024, 36, 49-62.
62. Han, A.; Yang, Q.; Chen, Y.; Li, J. Failure-distribution-dependent
63. Parasuraman, R.; Sheridan, T.; Wickens, C. A model for types and levels of human interaction with automation. IEEE. Trans. Syst. Man. Cybern. A. Syst. Hum. 2000, 30, 286-97.
64. Chiou, M.; Hawes, N.; Stolkin, R.; Shapiro, K. L.; Kerlin, J. R.; Clouter, A. Towards the principled study of variable autonomy in mobile robots. In 2015 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. Hong Kong, China; 9-12 October 2015, pp. 1053-59.
65. Losey, D. P.; Mcdonald, C. G.; Battaglia, E.; O'malley, M. K. A review of intent detection, arbitration, and communication aspects of shared control for physical human-robot interaction. Appl. Mech. Rev. 2018, 70, 010804.
66. Ames, A. D.; Xu, X.; Grizzle, J. W.; Tabuada, P. Control barrier function based quadratic programs for safety critical systems. IEEE. Trans. Autom. Control. 2017, 62, 3861-76.
67. Pappas, P.; Chiou, M.; Epsimos, G.; Nikolaou, G.; Stolkin, R. VFH+ based shared control for remotely operated mobile robots. In 2020 IEEE International Symposium on Safety, Security, and Rescue Robotics (SSRR). Abu Dhabi, UAE; 4-6 November 2020, pp. 366-73.
68. Javdani, S.; Srinivasa, S.; Bagnell, A. Shared autonomy via hindsight optimization. Robot. Sci. Syst. 2015, 10-15607.
69. Oh, Y.; Toussaint, M.; Mainprice, J. Learning arbitration for shared autonomy by hindsight data aggregation. arXiv 2019, arXiv:190612280.
70. Schaff, C.; Walter, M. Residual policy learning for shared autonomy. In Robotics: science and systems XVI. Corvalis, Oregon, USA; 12-16 July 2020.
71. Beer, J. M.; Fisk, A. D.; Rogers, W. A. Toward a framework for levels of robot autonomy in human-robot interaction. J. Hum. Robot. Interact. 2014, 3, 74.
73. Hirche, S.; Buss, M. Human-oriented control for haptic teleoperation. Proc. IEEE. 2012, 100, 623-47.
74. Rosenberg, L. B. Virtual fixtures: perceptual tools for telerobotic manipulation. In Proceedings of IEEE Virtual Reality Annual International Symposium. Seattle, WA, USA; 18-22 September 1993, pp. 76-82.
75. Abbott, J. J.; Marayong, P.; Okamura, A. M. Haptic virtual fixtures for robot-assisted manipulation. In Robotics research. Heidelberg: Springer; 2007. pp. 49-64.
76. Ewerton, M.; Arenz, O.; Peters, J. Assisted teleoperation in changing environments with a mixture of virtual guides. Adv. Robot. 2020, 34, 1157-70.
77. Li, L.; Jin, D.; Yang, H.; et al. Application of isomorphic remote manipulators with haptic feedback in the development of automatic analysis equipment for spent fuel reprocessing samples. Int. J. Adv. Nucl. Reactor. Des. Technol. 2025, 7, 331-40.
78. Dong, A.; Du, Z.; Yan, Z. A sensorless interaction forces estimator for bilateral teleoperation system based on online sparse Gaussian process regression. Mech. Mach. Theory. 2020, 143, 103620.
79. Chua, Z.; Okamura, A. M. Characterization of real-time haptic feedback from multimodal neural network-based force estimates during teleoperation. In 2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). Kyoto, Japan; 23-27 October 2022, pp. 1471-78.
80. Ji, H.; Li, S.; Wang, J.; Ruan, Z. Improving teleoperation through human-aware haptic feedback: a distinguishable and interpretable physical interaction based on the contact state. IEEE. Trans. Hum. Mach. Syst. 2023, 53, 24-34.
81. Ortenzi, V.; Marturi, N.; Stolkin, R.; Kuo, J. A.; Mistry, M. Vision-guided state estimation and control of robotic manipulators which lack proprioceptive sensors. In 2016 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS). Daejeon, South Korea; 9-14 October 2016, pp. 3567-74.
82. Jungo, A.; Doorenbos, L.; Da Col, T.; et al. Unsupervised out-of-distribution detection for safer robotically guided retinal microsurgery. Int. J. Comput. Assist. Radiol. Surg. 2023, 18, 1085-91.
83. Willaert, B.; Bohg, J.; Van Brussel, H.; Niemeyer, G. Towards multi-DOF model mediated teleoperation: using vision to augment feedback. In 2012 IEEE International Workshop on Haptic Audio Visual Environments and Games (HAVE 2012). Munich, Germany; 8-9 October 2012, pp. 25-31.
84. Kim, C.; Lee, D. Y. Adaptive model-mediated teleoperation for tasks interacting with uncertain environment. IEEE. Access. 2021, 9, 128188-201.
85. Hulin, T.; Panzirsch, M.; Singh, H.; et al. Model-augmented haptic telemanipulation: concept, retrospective overview, and current use cases. Front. Robot. AI. 2021, 8, 611251.
87. Parasuraman, R.; Riley, V. Humans and automation: use, misuse, disuse, abuse. Hum. Factors. 1997, 39, 230-53.
88. Sarter, N. B.; Woods, D. D. How in the world did we ever get into that mode? Mode error and awareness in supervisory control. Hum. Factors. 1995, 37, 5-19.
89. Endsley, M. R.; Kiris, E. O. The out-of-the-loop performance problem and level of control in automation. Hum. Factors. 1995, 37, 381-94.
90. De Visser, E. J.; Peeters, M. M. M.; Jung, M. F.; et al. Towards a theory of longitudinal trust calibration in human-robot teams. Int. J. Soc. Robot. 2019, 12, 459-78.
91. Wabersich, K. P.; Zeilinger, M. N. A predictive safety filter for learning-based control of constrained nonlinear dynamical systems. Automatica 2021, 129, 109597.
92. Desai, A.; Ghosh, S.; Seshia, S. A.; Shankar, N.; Tiwari, A. SOTER: a runtime assurance framework for programming safe robotics systems. In 2019 49th Annual IEEE/IFIP International Conference on Dependable Systems and Networks (DSN). Portland, OR, USA; 24-27 June 2019, pp. 138-50.
93. Seto, D.; Sha, L. An engineering method for safety region development. Fort Belvoir, VA: Defense Technical Information Center; 1999. Available from: https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/html/tr/ADA367624/ [Last accessed on 23 Jul 2026].
94. Slagel, J. T.; White, L. M.; Dutle, A.; Muñoz, C. A.; Crespo, N. A formal verification framework for runtime assurance. In NASA Formal Methods Symposium. Moffett Field, CA, USA; 4–6 June 2024, pp. 322-28.
95. Bonaci, T.; Herron, J.; Yusuf, T.; Yan, J.; Kohno, T.; Chizeck, H. J. To make a robot secure: an experimental analysis of cyber security threats against teleoperated surgical robots. arXiv 2015, arXiv:150404339.
96. Brunke, L.; Greeff, M.; Hall, A. W.; et al. Safe learning in robotics: from learning-based control to safe reinforcement learning. Annu. Rev. Control. Robot. Auton. Syst. 2022, 5, 411-44.
97. Chen, X.; Michel, Y.; Sadeghian, H.; Haddadin, S. Network-aware shared autonomy in bilateral teleoperation. In 2024 IEEE-RAS 23rd International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids). Nancy, France; 22-24 November 2024, pp. 888-94.
98. Güleçyüz, B.; Balachandran, R.; Panzirsch, M.; et al. Enhancing shared autonomy in teleoperation under network delay: transparency- and confidence-aware arbitration. IEEE. Robot. Autom. Lett. 2025, 10, 9654-61.
99. Dragan, A. D.; Srinivasa, S. S. Formalizing assistive teleoperation. In Robotics: science and systems; 2012, pp. 73-80.
100. Hüllermeier, E.; Waegeman, W. Aleatoric and epistemic uncertainty in machine learning: an introduction to concepts and methods. Mach. Learn. 2021, 110, 457-506.
101. Admoni, H.; Srinivasa, S. S. Predicting user intent through eye gaze for shared autonomy. In The 2016 AAAI Fall Symposium Series: Shared Autonomy in Research and Practice; 2016, pp. 298-303. Available from: https://aaai.org/papers/14137-14137-predicting-user-intent-through-eye-gaze-for-shared-autonomy/ [Last accessed on 23 Jul 2026].
102. Jain, S.; Argall, B. Recursive bayesian human intent recognition in shared-control robotics. In 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). Madrid, Spain; 1-5 October 2018, pp. 3905-12.
103. Abbink, D. A.; Mulder, M.; Boer, E. R. Haptic shared control: smoothly shifting control authority? Cogn. Technol. Work. 2011, 14, 19-28.
104. Panzirsch, M.; Balachandran, R.; Weber, B.; Ferre, M.; Artigas, J. Haptic augmentation for teleoperation through virtual grasping points. IEEE. Trans. Haptics. 2018, 11, 400-16.
105. Zhou, S.; Papatheodorou, S.; Leutenegger, S.; Schoellig, A. P. Control-barrier-aided teleoperation with visual-inertial SLAM for safe MAV navigation in complex environments. In 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). Yokohama, Japan; 13-17 May 2024, pp. 17836-42.
106. Flemisch, F.; Heesen, M.; Hesse, T.; Kelsch, J.; Schieben, A.; Beller, J. Towards a dynamic balance between humans and automation: authority, ability, responsibility and control in shared and cooperative control situations. Cogn. Technol. Work. 2011, 14, 3-18.
107. Alsabah, M.; Naser, M. A.; Mahmmod, B. M.; et al. 6G wireless communications networks: a comprehensive survey. IEEE. Access. 2021, 9, 148191-243.
108. Opiyo, S.; Zhou, J.; Mwangi, E.; Kai, W.; Sunusi, I. A review on teleoperation of mobile ground robots: Architecture and situation awareness. Int. J. Control. Autom. Syst. 2020, 19, 1384-407.
109. Tran, N.; Wu, J. Y.; Deguet, A.; Kazanzides, P. A Deep learning approach to intrinsic force sensing on the da vinci surgical robot. In: 2020 Fourth IEEE International Conference on Robotic Computing (IRC). Taichung, Taiwan; 9-11 November 2020, pp. 25-32.
110. Chua, Z.; Jarc, A. M.; Okamura, A. M. Toward force estimation in robot-assisted surgery using deep learning with vision and robot state. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). Xi'an, China; May 30-June 5, 2021, pp. 12335-41.
