PWR-214 · Robotics, BCI & Shared Autonomy

Shared autonomy

Shared autonomy can improve selected tasks, but value depends on how control, intent, override and failure are configured.

Read the complete explanationCompare the Frontier record

Revision 7T · Full Tutorial Edition · Release manifest · Methodology · Corrections

One source of teaching truth

Canonical Power learning unit · TLU-PWR-214

With a qualified team, the learner completes a simulated navigation or manipulation task in manual, automatic and shared modes, logs intent conflicts and demonstrates override.

Canonical Power page
PWR-214 · Shared autonomy
Full tutorial
Open full tutorial
Practical authority
The tutorial teaches the complete method; qualified supervision controls the specified practical parts.
Current treatment
Full supervised tutorial
Research depth
deep · 6 bound sources
Risk framing
high regulated device or robotics
Capability self-practice
Qualified supervision is required for the practical method
Pathway membership
Retained external route · SP-HUB-004

Open My Power Path Inspect the canonical record

Read before using this page

Explanation is not permission.

This dossier explains the evidence and its limits. It is not a diagnosis, personal recommendation, assessment, clearance, performance promise or training programme. Actionable teaching appears only when the canonical Power record explicitly authorises it.

Complete bounded explanation

What this power means.

Capability to develop or express shared autonomy in a declared context without inheriting broader claims.

What the current evidence supports

Shared autonomy can improve selected tasks, but value depends on how control, intent, override and failure are configured.

How to observe or measure it without overclaiming

Task success, intent errors, override latency, workload, collisions and failure recovery versus manual, autonomous and shared control. This measures the declared configured system and cannot by itself establish broad transfer, unaided ability, safety or legitimacy.

Myth

The robot always knows what the user wants

Metric

Task success, intent errors, override latency, workload, collisions and failure recovery versus manual, autonomous and shared control

Boundary

Report person, device/model/interface, task, assistance, failure state and comparator; the metric is not proof of unaided general capability.

Negative and limiting findings

  • Studies were small or used nondisabled participants; intent inference, slower travel and failure-state agency remain unresolved.
  • No cited evidence supports perfect, universal or consequence-free performance.

Claims this evidence cannot support

  • The robot always knows what the user wants
  • The tool or robot's output proves an unaided, universal or permanent human superpower
  • A successful laboratory task proves independent real-world or clinical capability

Individual tutorial · FULL SUPERVISED TUTORIAL

How to learn this Power now.

With a qualified team, the learner completes a simulated navigation or manipulation task in manual, automatic and shared modes, logs intent conflicts and demonstrates override.

  1. Get readyObtain qualified clinical-engineering supervision and participant consent for the exact simulator or approved device.
  2. Learn the method8 concrete steps teach the permitted method from start to finish.
  3. See right and wrong4 comparisons show correct or safer execution beside common wrong or riskier choices.
  4. PractiseThe clinical-engineering team sets mode order, repetitions and progression. Use one matched route per mode with rest; repeat only after intent errors, overrides, workload and agency are reviewed.
  5. Check progressConfigured fixture: A wheelchair-style simulator travels a marked virtual corridor. The person commands direction; automation may slow or steer around foam obstacles. A bright mode label shows MANUAL, AUTO or SHARED. The provider logs “Make mode visible”, every “Run shared mode” result, the “Practise degraded control” response and Task success, intent errors, override latency, workload, collisions and failure recovery versus manual, autonomous and shared control. Mark MANUAL, AUTO or SHARED on every route row, then log the person’s command, automation correction, override, assistance loss, collision and workload; an improvement counts only within a clearly named mode.

Authority boundary: Titan teaches the complete method; a qualified person controls the parts that require supervision, clearance, specialist equipment, load, dose or progression. The method is Power-specific; its actionability follows this treatment.

Open the full tutorialOpen My Power Path

Related Powers: PWR-209 · PWR-210 · PWR-211 · PWR-212

Direct evidence register

Sources that support—and limit—the claim.

Citation roles are explicit. A source may support existence or trainability while simultaneously limiting transfer, certainty, generalisation or safety.

  1. Primary empirical supportLimiting / contrary
    Shared control of a medical robot with haptic guidance

    Linfei Xiong; Chin Boon Chng; Chee Kong Chui; Peiwu Yu; Yao Li · 2017 · Primary research

  2. Primary empirical supportLimiting / contrary
    Continuous shared control of a mobile robot with brain–computer interface and autonomous navigation for daily assistance

    Baoguo Xu; Deping Liu; Muhui Xue; Minmin Miao; Cong Hu; Aiguo Song · 2023 · Primary research

  3. Primary empirical supportLimiting / contrary
    Assistive Robotic Manipulation through Shared Autonomy and a Body-Machine Interface

    Siddarth Jain; Ali Farshchiansadegh; Alexander Broad; Farnaz Abdollahi; Ferdinando Mussa-Ivaldi; Brenna D. Argall · 2015 · Primary research

  4. Primary empirical supportLimiting / contrary
    Evaluation of semiautonomous navigation assistance system for power wheelchairs with blindfolded nondisabled individuals

    Vinod Sharma; Richard C. Simpson; Edmund LoPresti; Mark Schmeler · 2010 · Primary research

  5. Limiting / contraryOfficial boundary context
    NIST Privacy Framework: A Tool for Improving Privacy Through Enterprise Risk Management, Version 1.0

    National Institute of Standards and Technology · 2020 · Official authority

  6. Limiting / contraryOfficial boundary context
    Cybersecurity in Medical Devices: Quality Management System Considerations and Content of Premarket Submissions

    United States Food and Drug Administration · 2026 · Official authority

Current teaching and evidence boundary

The next gate remains visible.

External confirmation is required before higher-authority use because: a clinical, high-risk or regulated configuration; a supervision or non-attempt boundary; cultural, community-rights or affected-person authority; a restricted safety or legitimacy boundary.

A Power-specific tutorial is available at /tutorials/pwr-214/. It contains a plain-English method, 8 ordered steps, a worked example, right-versus-wrong comparisons, specific mistakes and corrections, practice, measurement, accessibility, stopping rules and evidence. Its supervised mode remains controlling.