Recent Advancements in Augmented Reality for Robotic Applications: A Survey
, Jianzhuang Zhao 1,†, Qingsheng Liu 1,4,†, Elisa Iovene 1,†, Giancarlo Ferrigno 1 and Elena De Momi 1,*Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments to the Authors:
In summary:
This article discusses the integration of Augmented Reality (AR) into various robotic applications, including medical and industrial scenarios. It explores AR's use in preoperative planning, surgical training, human-robot interaction, task allocation, and more. The review emphasizes its expanding role in medical robotics, rehabilitative robotics, social robotics, and mobile/aerial systems. The article also highlights the challenges and limitations of AR in robotics while providing valuable insights into the state-of-the-art and potential improvements in the field. Overall, it serves as a valuable resource for researchers in the AR and robotic domain.
Before I recommend this manuscript for publication in Actuators, one issue should be clarified, listed as below:
1. The review lacks sufficient quantitative data, particularly in the tables, where only qualitative descriptions are provided. To enhance the study, the authors should include more data on key parameters such as Field of View (FoV), resolution, accuracy, and latency of AR devices used in robotic applications. These parameters are crucial and are also emphasized in the authors' discussion. By incorporating more quantitative data, the review would be more comprehensive and informative for readers.
Author Response
The detailed response to the comments can be found in the attached response letter, thanks.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
This manuscript has a fairly intensive literature review put together with 135 state-of-the-art referenced.
1. Medical Robotics and Industrial Robotics are two very comprehensive fields. Although there are significant overlapping with these two, their differences are substantial. Therefore, it will be quite hard for readers to follow the manuscript. The resources provided in this survey can be also confusing for medical or industrial robotics users. Thus, it might be making better senses to split the works into two papers. Alternatively, a comparative study clearly indicating the relevance and differences between the two fields is absolutely necessary.
2. AR and VR are two different technologies, they however, share a lot of common things including their foundations, and enabling components. It is therefore not making senses to have a clear cut with AR alone when discussing medical robotics in this survey.
3. Medical robots have a long history. For AR and Medical robots, it will be interesting to have some discussions on their past. Historically, minimally invasive surgery (MIS) or less invasive surgery (LIS), and intra-cardiac interventions (ICI) are often referred as pioneering areas for medical VR/AR and medical robotics, see https://pure.johnshopkins.edu/en/publications/virtual-reality-training-in-interventional-radiology-the-johns-ho-3
The survey should consider enhancing in this part.
4. The Medical Image Computing and Computer-assisted Intervention (MICCAI, https://miccai.org/), one of the world largest research communities have been making significant effort promoting medical robots and AR which should be mentioned in this survey.
5. AR, Medical Robots and Industrial Robots are closely related to AI research nowadays. It will be good to see some literature review along this is direction.
Mostly fine.
Author Response
The detailed response to the comments can be found in the attached response letter, thanks.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
In this study, the authors thoroughly review AR technology in medical and industrial scenarios. AR in the medical robotic context and industrial applications are summarized in four main divisions. In addition, popular robotic devices, mediums, and AR systems are included. The motivation is very clear and persuasive. It is concise, well-structured, and well-written. The relevant studies are listed, and a comparison is made. The references are suitable for the study. The limitations and challenges are underlined along with the future plans.
Minor Review:
- Figure 1, caption "...;Fight: AR-guidance for the robot-assisted ..." -> fix it to "...;Right: AR-guidance for the robot-assisted ..."
Author Response
The detailed response to the comments can be found in the attached response letter, thanks.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
