Author
Listed:
- Patricia Muchova
(Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnologies, Technical University of Kosice, Letna 9, 04200 Kosice, Slovakia)
- Janka Saderova
(Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnologies, Technical University of Kosice, Letna 9, 04200 Kosice, Slovakia)
- Marek Ondov
(Faculty of Mining, Ecology, Process Control and Geotechnologies, Technical University of Kosice, Letna 9, 04200 Kosice, Slovakia)
Abstract
Human–computer interaction (HCI) has evolved from traditional command-based interfaces to adaptive systems powered by artificial intelligence (AI). In industrial environments, particularly manufacturing and logistics, selecting the appropriate interaction modality is crucial for efficiency, safety, and user acceptance. This study presents a conceptual decision support framework that analyzes three modalities—visual, voice, and multimodal—based on a systematic literature review covering the period from 2003 to early 2026. The analysis evaluates differences in usability, cognitive workload, implementation complexity, and operational benefits of HCI and AI-based HCI. To address the selection challenge, a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) model was developed. The proposed MCDA model is based on a structured literature analysis and expert-informed evaluation. The expert-based MCDA ranking is context-dependent and grounded in the reviewed literature. The results indicate that multimodal HCI shows the highest potential in manufacturing scenarios, offering advantages in safety, robustness, flexibility, and potential contributions to sustainability. However, it also indicates more demanding implementation, training requirements, and higher costs. The proposed decision support framework is intended to serve as a methodological tool for the structured evaluation of HCI modality suitability in sustainable manufacturing environments.
Suggested Citation
Patricia Muchova & Janka Saderova & Marek Ondov, 2026.
"Comparison of AI-Based HCI Modalities for Selecting Interaction Systems in Sustainable Manufacturing,"
Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 18(10), pages 1-26, May.
Handle:
RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:10:p:4638-:d:1936977
Download full text from publisher
Corrections
All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:18:y:2026:i:10:p:4638-:d:1936977. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.
If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.
We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .
If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager The email address of this maintainer does not seem to be valid anymore. Please ask MDPI Indexing Manager to update the entry or send us the correct address
(email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .
Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through
the various RePEc services.