Perception of Semi-Autonomous Intelligent Vehicles Such as Smart

Powered Wheelchairs

Malik Haddad

1,3

, David Sanders

2,3

, Giles Tewkesbury

2,3

, Shikun Zhou

2,3

and Martin Langner

2,3

Northeastern University – London, St. Katharine’s Way, London, U.K.

Faculty of Technology, University of Portsmouth, Anglesea Road, Portsmouth, U.K.

Chailey Heritage Foundation, North Chailey, Lewes, U.K.

Keywords: Smart Wheelchair, Autonomous, Semi-Autonomous, Autonomy.

Abstract: This paper investigates perceptions of what semi-autonomous vehicles such as Smart powered-wheelchairs

are and whether perception has changed. Information about semi-autonomous vehicles (especially powered-

wheelchairs) was analysed to investigate how concepts and their benefits are perceived. Some common

understanding is found, but there is uncertainty about whether autonomous/semi-autonomous implies

automatic/un-manned. There is a tendency to distinguish between semi-autonomous and un-manned but that

distinction does not appear to be made in the minds of everyday people. Implications of this are discussed.

1 INTRODUCTION

Automation has been used with powered-wheelchairs

since their inception (Sanders et al, 2010a; 2011a).

Technological innovations have allowed many

manual tasks to be automated, letting wheelchair

users operate their chairs more safely and with greater

efficiency (Sanders et al., 2010b, Haddad et al.,

2020a). At times automation can take over

completely but that is not ideal (Sanders et al., 2011b;

Haddad and Sanders, 2019). Despite awareness of the

matter, people don’t really appear to understand what

a semi-autonomous vehicle is (Eriksen, 2019).

There are barriers that put off disabled people or

carers from taking up assistive mobility and

technology. These include cost, difficulties procuring

equipment, and lack of funding, information and

understanding. The lack of understanding has led to a

fear of assistive mobility and technology, a shortage

of suitable support and training, unhelpful way of

thinking, too little evaluation, problems overseeing

equipment, and lack of resources (such as time) and

other provision. This paper investigates the

understanding of the terminology surrounding

powered mobility, especially phrases such as semi-

autonomous and autonomous.

Autonomy can be defined as “the ability to act and

make decisions without being controlled by anyone

else” (Hornby, Ashby and Wehmeier, 2005). So

semi-autonomy is something between a wheelchair

user and an automated system being in control

(Haddad et al., 2020b). An everyday view of

autonomy is that it “acts and makes decisions”, but

that suggests a capability to engender desires and then

act on them (Eriksen, 2019). A system that was

completely autonomous would occasionally operate

using objectives that it created so that it would be

essentially un-deterministic. The more autonomy, the

less controllable something is (Rødseth and

Burmeister, 2012). An autonomous robot would be

wholly intelligent, and therefore not completely

manageable, except through negotiation. Such a

system is not desirable for powered-wheelchairs as

the idea is to assist a user, although it can be safer for

a system to sometimes take over. So, the most a

powered-wheelchair should be is semi-autonomous.

Autonomy has come to mean something else over

time as words do change their meaning over time. For

example, in the 1300s, artificial meant it was created

artfully by a skilled craftsman (@Listverse, 2016).

Problems can arise when words are not defined

clearly or when a contradictory use or definition

exists. That can cause problems as statements or

projections may suggest to expectations that are just

not realistic. It can be hard to challenge a statement

when it is ambiguous.

The motivation of this paper is to explores how

semi-autonomous powered-wheelchairs are defined

and perceived and to explore whether that is

Haddad, M., Sanders, D., Tewkesbury, G., Zhou, S. and Langner, M.

Perception of Semi-Autonomous Intelligent Vehicles Such as Smart Powered Wheelchairs.

DOI: 10.5220/0011903300003612

In Proceedings of the 3rd International Symposium on Automation, Information and Computing (ISAIC 2022), pages 86-91

ISBN: 978-989-758-622-4; ISSN: 2975-9463

 2023 by SCITEPRESS – Science and Technology Publications, Lda. Under CC license (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0)

understood. Some supposed advantages of semi-

autonomous powered-wheelchairs are also

considered, along with some anticipated challenges.

2 AUTONOMOUS CONTRASTED

WITH AUTOMATION

Automation refers to using a computer or machine or

to do work rather than using a person (Cambridge

Dictionary, 2019). Automation surrounds us.

Autonomy and automation sound related but,

although a house may be able to sustain a fairly

continuous temperature without a human being

interacting with the system once set, a house isn’t

autonomous. Automation and autonomy are not the

same thing, but they do overlap. They can both be

considered to be on a continuous scale with

automation or autonomy at one end and manual

processes at the other end. Modern Smart powered-

wheelchairs all have some automation on-board and

a semi-autonomous system requires some

automation. But is how complex the level of

automation is enough to decide that a system is semi-

autonomous. And if that is the case then where would

the dividing line be? Smart wheelchairs can start and

stop without human interaction, instead the signals

come from a management system. Motor control

systems are becoming more complicated. Some cars

have had these systems for a while, so that they are

automated (but not autonomous). A Nissan engineer,

said “a truly autonomous car would be one where you

request it to take you to work and it decides to go to

the beach instead” (Eriksen, 2019).

The term semi-autonomous car usually refers to a

car in which some of the driving function(s) might be

automated (or partially automated). An autonomous

car is self-driving. That also appears to apply to Smart

wheelchairs, but the matter of self-driving becomes

problematic there. A human user controls a

wheelchair’s heading but sensor systems can

sometimes adjust that control, for example to avoid

an obstacle. Other wheelchairs follow tracks laid out

on or under the ground and automatically change

course at junctions. Powered-wheelchairs with

dynamic positioning systems go further and might

conduct precise movements without specific

instructions from their drivers. If the dividing line

between non- autonomous, semi-autonomous and

autonomous is self-driving, then a missing instance

might just be the capacity to perceive and then plan

ahead to avoid other powered-wheelchairs. That is to

use Global path planning rather than obstacle

avoidance.

In short, definitions of autonomy that can be

found within dictionaries do not mean the sort of

autonomy found within vehicles. Automation is

needed to provide some level of autonomy, but even

complicated automation is not in autonomous. Self-

driving might be required but will only ever be a

fraction of the whole answer.

3 METHOD

Material used for research described in this paper was

mainly gathered through literature searches, but was

supported by more focused questionnaires and

interviews. The research focused on that way in

which phrases and words were used in speech and

writing, and how people generally described the

theme. The research considered how knowledgeable

readers might expect to understand the words. That

was subjective though and another reader might form

a different understanding depending on their attitude,

focus and knowledge. The research tried not to

interpret or extrapolate statements and not to read any

pre-conception beyond that which was originally

intended. Text was examined and evaluated, focusing

on: How is autonomy defined, and what characterizes

an autonomous or semi-autonomous vehicle? How is

the term autonomy used in relation to automation?

What benefits are expected from semi-autonomous

vehicles? What challenges are expected during the

development and operation of semi-autonomous

vehicles?

This research investigated articles in conference

proceedings and scientific journals. But the focus was

on understanding how lay people perceived the notion

of semi-autonomous vehicles, and especially

powered-wheelchairs. Material with different

focuses, including human nature, business,

technological and legal, were incorporated to provide

a broad view of perceptions of semi-autonomous

powered-wheelchairs.

News stories were included although they were

not considered to be completely accurate sources of

scientific material. However, they did convey how

“semi-autonomous” was seen by the public.

Newspaper stories fed the prospects, benefits and

definitions of semi-autonomous vehicles (and

especially powered-wheelchairs) to the wider public

and the way that they were portrayed informed their

perception of the topic. The news stories were mainly

extracted from online open-source magazines. Six

press-releases were also incorporated. Quantitative

Perception of Semi-Autonomous Intelligent Vehicles Such as Smart Powered Wheelchairs

approaches were adopted in analysing both the news

stories and the science literature. Two matrices were

created, one for the news stories and one for the

science literature. Some statements and phrases were

common in the news stories but not within the science

literature and some statements and phrases were

common in the science literature but not within news

stories.

Use of the term automation compared to

autonomy, and semi-autonomous compared to un-

manned, were assessed to decide whether there was

“clear separation” between them. “No or unclear

separation” meant connection was clearly implied or

they were explicitly used synonymously, such as “a

challenge for a semi-autonomous vehicle designed to

operate safely without intervention from the driver”.

The analysis treated a paper or article as a single

document but did search for contradictory

declarations within the text. If one document talks

about a benefit of semi-autonomous or -autonomous

vehicles, for example, while another document

presented a statement that opposed the first, then both

of the views were recorded for that document. The

same was the case for relationships between

statements. In one news article, two sources were

interviewed that each had their own take on

autonomy. The first source explained “there are many

perceptions of what " autonomous" actually means

and whether the term refers to un-manned or

manned”, separating the two terms. Later, the other

document stated that “in general if we compare

manned and autonomous vessels, the savings for

autonomous vessels is roughly 23 percent”, implying

that autonomous vessels are un-manned. So, both

classes “no or unclear separation” and “clear

separation” were recorded.

4 ANALYSIS

The material studied consisted of 23 papers, three

brochures and four reports all written by twenty-one

editors and authors. Research investigated potential

concepts for partially autonomous powered-

wheelchairs. The focus was on manned operation, but

vehicles could operate semi-autonomously or

automatically. A smart wheelchair must have some

mechanical redundancy and requires sensors and

more advanced automation than a standard powered

wheelchair. The next generation of Smart wheelchairs

are expected to include flexible and integrated

controllers and wireless communications. Advanced

decision support systems will allow powered-

wheelchairs to function under semi (or sometimes

autonomous) control. Various authors have set out

initial positions and rationale about developing

powered-wheelchairs but the relationships between

semi-autonomous, automatic, and intelligent control

are blurred. Full autonomy is not desirable for a

powered wheelchair; assistive technology is required

rather than autonomy. A wheelchair without any

constraint would be non-deterministic. That amount

of autonomy, sometimes called fully autonomous

(Eriksen, 2019), has been called intelligent. Rather

misleadingly, intelligent is a level of autonomy that

sits above semi-autonomous or autonomous (figure

1). Automatic is below autonomous on the scale of

autonomy. Semi-autonomous would be somewhere in

between.

Figure 1: Determinism against Autonomy in MUNIN

(Rødseth & Burmeister, 2012).

A definition of autonomous control is “the ability

to make complex decisions that may not be easily

described through mathematical or logic formulas,

but which still are constrained within certain

predefined limits” (Eriksen, 2019; Rødseth &

Burmeister, 2012). They explained that “most

systems that claimed to have semi-autonomous

control functions were mostly automatic rather than

truly semi-autonomous or even intelligent” (Eriksen,

2019). The team at Portsmouth are aiming for an

automatic powered-wheelchair with the ability to

handle certain unplanned situations within defined

constraints that can be controlled by a human user.

What is often meant by autonomy can be a

complicated type of automation (figure. 1), where

autonomy and automation. In figure 1 they are shown

on the same scale. When automation is used “it is

assumed that gradual automation will step by step

lead the way to truly autonomous in the future”.

The terms semi-autonomous and un-manned have

been defined: “A semi-autonomous powered-

wheelchair navigates and takes evasive action based

on an automated software system”. A semi-

autonomous powered-wheelchair would not really be

able to operate when un-manned, and what would be

the point? An un-manned powered-wheelchair would

have to be more than semi-autonomous; it could

ISAIC 2022 - International Symposium on Automation, Information and Computing

sometimes be under semi-autonomous control but it

could also be remote controlled from a Control

Centre, or somewhere else. This definition helps to

separate the terms: a semi-autonomous powered-

wheelchair needs to be manned, an un-manned

powered-wheelchair is not semi-autonomous and an

autonomous powered wheelchair becomes something

else. In spite of that, the two terms have frequently

been used interchangeably and occasionally

synonymously. The use of the terms semi-

autonomous and un-manned has varied, with

publications and documents sometimes favouring one

or sometimes the other, but regularly there is a mix of

the terms used interchangeably. Un-manned has

described both the operation of a vehicle and the

vehicle itself as an individual object. Autonomous has

described systems controlling semi-autonomous

vehicles (such as wheelchairs), and the navigation or

operating mode, and the individual vehicle as an

object.

Benefits of semi-autonomous powered-

wheelchairs include reducing carer costs, and

improving safety for both the powered-wheelchair

and the wheelchair user. The latter because of a

reduced risk of human error. Human error has been a

contributing factor or the whole cause of a lot of

accidents (Eriksen, 2019). More autonomy could

improve powered-wheelchair safety by partly

replacing a human user with automation. By

eliminating at least some of the human user in the

control loop, some of the risk of harm to them and

other people reduces. But that can defeat the object.

Powered-wheelchair intelligence can come from

increasing the collection of data and increasing the

speed and amount of processing. Increasing powered-

wheelchair intelligence could optimize operation and

route planning and improve management and

condition monitoring of both the user and the

wheelchair. The challenges in developing and

operating semi-autonomous powered-wheelchairs are

in achieving sufficient technical robustness and

communication links.

A lack of contractual or legal frameworks around

semi-autonomous powered-wheelchairs is cited, and

the difficulty of transferring “powered-wheelchair

sense” to a User is alluded to together with the issue

of automation awareness where a driver may not be

completely aware of how much the automated system

is doing. A semi-autonomous powered-wheelchair

needs to be under constant supervision from a user

who is able to take over control or at least direct the

wheelchair if required. A situation can arise that an

onboard system can’t deal with so that a powered-

wheelchair must be able to stop safely, essentially

requiring some position control (or at least a brake).

More sensors, automation and mechanical

redundancy are needed. Autonomous (or semi-

autonomous) powered-wheelchair, is not defined

anywhere. Semi-autonomous is generally used to

describe a Smart wheelchair but that is used

interchangeably or synonymously with intelligent

and Smart.

There is a danger of skill degradation in

wheelchair users if they do not experience full control

of their wheelchair, especially if a semi-autonomous

system is taking control some of the time and the user

does not understand the cause and effect. Skill

degradation or lack of learning, combined with

reduced situational awareness, may be critical when a

user is suddenly required to react or quickly take

control. Poor automation awareness and poor

situational awareness can be risky, particularly when

a wheelchair user or carer is expected to monitor their

own powered-wheelchair systems or other assistive

systems. It may be challenging to add “safe driving”

to a semi-autonomous system.

Scientific papers focused on human, commercial

and legal aspects, or on developing and testing

explicit technical techniques and schemes. The focus

of a document had an effect on the precision of the

definitions of semi-autonomous or Smart powered-

wheelchairs within the document. Documents

exploring wider consequences tended to be more

specific. Documents describing technical systems

tended to describe the systems in detail, while the

general concept of powered-wheelchair autonomy

was more vaguely defined and sometimes not defined

at all, because it was not needed to understand the

technical system(s) themselves. Smart was often used

as either an overarching term that encompassed the

semi-autonomous powered-wheelchair or

synonymously with autonomous or semi-

autonomous. There was usually a separation between

terms. One example said: “note that the terms un-

manned and autonomous or semi-autonomous are

often interchanged, but they are not the same”. There

was sometimes no or unclear separation between

terms, such as where manned and semi-autonomous

were juxtaposed. Sometimes terms were used

interchangeably. In other cases, the separation

between terms was not sufficiently discussed.

The potential benefit of increased reliability for

semi-autonomous powered-wheelchairs was

mentioned once. Some papers mention the semi-

autonomous powered-wheelchair or Smart Chair

having a positive impact on users. The most

frequently mentioned challenge was that legislation

does not allow for semi-autonomous driving

Perception of Semi-Autonomous Intelligent Vehicles Such as Smart Powered Wheelchairs

outdoors. The man-machine interface for semi-

autonomous powered-wheelchairs was mentioned as

problematic in many papers. They tended to

concentrate on bespoke input devices. Some papers

stated that the cost of building a semi-autonomous

powered-wheelchair is higher than for a standard

powered-wheelchair, while only one expected it

might be less. Public perception of semi-autonomous

powered-wheelchairs as being a little unsafe was

mentioned in connection with mobility scooters being

used on public roads

News stories contained statements, opinions and

views from many sources. Their shortness did not

allow complete and in-depth coverage or for detailed

definitions. Journalists sometimes may have quoted

things out-of-context or have paraphrased a source,

and that might provide inexact depictions of an

original message. Statements and the perception of

semi-autonomous powered-wheelchairs within the

news ought consequently to be considered carefully.

When the news stories were studied together then

some interesting potential trends emerged. Nineteen

articles, six quotes and paraphrases and sixteen

reports of interviews were considered. Smart was

often used synonymously with powered-wheelchair

or as an all-encompassing expression incorporating

semi-autonomous powered-wheelchairs. The term

intelligent powered-wheelchair was used in seven.

Nine articles use the words automation or automated

in the discussion of semi-autonomous powered-

wheelchairs. In none of these articles was there a clear

distinction between the terms. In some articles, the

words seem to be used synonymously.

Using automation and autonomy synonymously

did not appear to be becoming less common over

time. Separation between terminologies was not clear

in six out of nine 2020 articles. Of documents printed

before 2020, only five out of the thirteen had unclear

separation. In only three news stories was it well-

defined that autonomy didn.t mean un-manned. A

quote in one story joined autonomous to un-manned,

so that the story showed both “unclear” and “clear”

separation. However, four stories specified that

autonomous vehicles weren’t necessarily un-manned,

and autonomy might be used for wheelchairs.

Statements implying that autonomous is un-manned

were somewhere in the text in all the stories.,

Some documents make a distinction between

autonomous and semi-autonomous, while others

assume that remote-control is a type of autonomy.

Safety of semi-autonomous powered-wheelchairs for

both the wheelchair and the driver is often mentioned,

appearing in most documents. In most cases, it was

specified that the improvement in safety was a result

of reduced human error. That claim is contested in

some documents. Reducing costs was cited three

times, while optimizing efficiency was highlighted in

technical articles (although one did challenge that).

Reduced carer costs also had two mentions.

Regarding challenges in the development of semi-

autonomous powered-wheelchairs, the fact that the

business case is not yet clearly proven is occasionally

mentioned, the issue of road and traffic legislation not

accommodating semi-autonomous powered-

wheelchairs is mentioned once. Other challenges

mentioned were user skill degradation, data security

and perception of the general public.

5 DISCUSSION

There is general agreement on some aspects. Semi-

autonomous powered-wheelchairs need more sensors

and automation. Some documents said autonomous

meant un-manned, while others said it certainly did

not (Eriksen, 2019). But many documents either said

autonomous may be manned in one place but then

used un-manned and autonomous synonymously or

they were sometimes vague in making a distinction.

That ambiguity appears to be common.

There is a trend in the scientific literature for

recent papers to be clearer in separating autonomous

and semi-autonomous and un-manned. There may be

an increasing awareness of the need to define

autonomy because of the ambiguity. That is not true

of news stories though where they tend appear to be

becoming less and less clear about the separation

between autonomous and automation and semi-

autonomous. Definitions of autonomy have come to

mean something closer to automation so that the

expressions are used synonymously. Awareness

might also be increasing.

A lot of ideas about autonomy are related to un-

manned operation but that is not relevant in assistive

technology. Removing a carer and providing more

autonomy for the users is only possible if a

wheelchair is semi-autonomous. If a carer is still

required then costs are similar even if they are doing

less, they may also be subjected to more complicated

and stressful working conditions.

As human drivers are still within the control loop,

it is difficult to assess the benefits of increased safety

for powered-wheelchairs and drivers due to

reductions in human error. Increased safety is often

mentioned as a benefit of using a semi-autonomous

powered-wheelchair, but it can be contested. Other

benefits can be derived from making control systems

simpler to use, possibly with more sensors and greater

ISAIC 2022 - International Symposium on Automation, Information and Computing

redundancy. There might be better reliability and

increased efficiency but that is not always clear.

6 CONCLUSIONS

The concept of a semi-autonomous powered-

wheelchair is understood but there isn’t any

agreement about a definition, for example of

autonomous, semi-autonomous and un-manned

(Eriksen, 2019). There is an increasing awareness

within scientific material of the need to separate

terms, but that has not filtered out into newspaper

stories.

The changing perceptions of what autonomous,

automatic and semi-autonomous mean (and whether

any means un-manned) hasn’t altered the

expectations about what autonomy might bring.

Whether autonomous systems are un-manned or not

has a massive influence on their expected benefits.

Most benefits of semi-autonomous powered-

wheelchairs are related to assisting the wheelchair

user on board their wheelchair. What a semi-

autonomous powered-wheelchair is if it is un-manned

is not clear. Many researchers have defined what a

semi-autonomous powered-wheelchair is, and

academic and technical papers have defined

autonomy (and sometimes different levels of

increasing autonomy). That is important, but

definitions haven’t been understood by the general

public.

REFERENCES

Sanders, D., Tewkesbury, G., Graham-Jones, J., 2011.

Simple rules to modify pre-planned paths and improve

gross robot motions associated with pick & place

assembly tasks, Assembly Autom, 31 1 pp 69-78.

Sanders, D., Graham-Jones ,J., Gegov, A., 2010. Improving

ability of tele-operators to complete progressively more

difficult mobile robot paths using simple expert systems

and ultrasonic sensors, Industrial Robot: An

International Journal 37 5 pp 431-440.

Sanders, D., Lambert, G., Graham-Jones, J., Tewkesbury,

G., Onuh, S., Ndzi, D., Ross, C., 2010. A robotic

welding system using image processing techniques and

a CAD model to provide information to a multi-

intelligent decision module, Assembly Autom 30 4 pp

323-332.

Haddad, M., Sanders, D., Langner, M., Bausch, N., Thabet,

M., Gegov, A., Tewkesbury, G., Ikwan, F., 2020d.

Intelligent control of the steering for a powered

wheelchair using a microcomputer. In SAI Intelligent

Systems Conference. Springer.

Sanders, D., Tewkesbury, G., Stott, I., Robinson, D., 2011.

Simple expert systems to improve an ultrasonic sensor-

system for a tele-operated mobile-robot, Sensor Review

31 3 pp 246-260.

Haddad, M., Sanders, D., 2019. Selecting a best

compromise direction for a powered wheelchair using

PROMETHEE, IEEE Trans. Neur. Sys. Rehab. 27 2 pp

228-235.

Eriksen, S., 2019. Autonomous Ships – Changing

Perceptions and Expectations. 18th International

Conference on Computer and IT Applications in the

Maritime Industries, Technische Universität

(Hamburg) pp 33-39.

Hornby, A., Ashby, M., Wehmeier, S., 2005. Oxford

advanced learner's dictionary of current English,

Oxford, Oxford University Press.

Haddad, M., Sanders, D., Ikwan, F., Thabet, M., Langner,

M., Gegov, A., 2020c. Intelligent HMI and control for

steering a powered wheelchair using a Raspberry Pi

microcomputer. In 2020 IEEE 10th International

Conference on Intelligent Systems-IS. IEEE.

Rødseth, Ø., Burmeister, H. 2012. Developments toward

the un-manned ship. In Int. Symp. Information on ships.

Un-manned-ship.

@Listverse. 10 Words That Originally Meant Something

Really Different Feb. 12, 2016. Accessed on: Feb. 8,

2021. [Online]. Listverse. Available:

https://listverse.com/2016/02/12/10-words-that-

originally-meant-something-really-different/

Cambridge Dictionary. 2019. Cambridge Business English

Dictionary Accessed on Feb. 8, 2021. [Online].

Cambridge University Press:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/aut

omation

Perception of Semi-Autonomous Intelligent Vehicles Such as Smart Powered Wheelchairs