Nonverbal Auditory Communication for Human–Robot Interaction in Industry 5.0: A Scoping Review

Résumé fourni par la source

In Industry 5.0 (I5.0), close-proximity human–robot collaboration demands communication beyond conventional alarms and speech. Nonverbal auditory communication offers a complementary modality, yet its role in I5.0 remains unmapped. This scoping review maps nonverbal auditory communication research in I5.0 Human–Robot Interaction (HRI) and compares it with general HRI literature to identify transfer potential and research gaps. Peer-reviewed English-language articles (2023–April 2026) addressing nonverbal sound in HRI contexts were included. Speech, emotion detection, haptic interfaces and non-HRI domains were excluded. A search with two syntaxes across Web of Science, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, ACM and MDPI, supplemented by citation searching, targeted I5.0-specific (Syntax S1) and general HRI auditory literature (Syntax S2). This created two article record sets, n1 and n2. Articles were organized following Arksey and O’Malley’s framework and PRISMA-ScR into four inductively derived clusters: Sonification, Multimodal Feedback Systems, Safety and Frameworks and Concepts. From 782 initial records, 16 (n1) and 32 (n2) articles were included. In I5.0, multimodal feedback dominates: intentionally designed nonverbal sounds improve situational awareness, reduce cognitive workload and increase perceived safety. Compared to n2, which is shaped by social robotics and emotion-driven sound design, five gaps emerge in I5.0: absent emotion-related sound perception research, missing field studies, missing industry-specific sound design frameworks, underutilized sonification for spatial awareness and safety and no unimodal auditory studies under realistic industrial conditions. A dedicated sound design framework operationalizing I5.0 communicative requirements into designable sound parameters is needed, alongside empirical validation under realistic industrial noise conditions.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.