## 1 Introduction, Motivation, and Related Research  
Human-Robot Interaction (HRI) is an attractive field of study for many scholars from different research domains. HRI focuses on understanding, designing and evaluating robotics systems which involve the human as an essential element of these systems [1]. HRI originates from a literature roots, as the fundamentals of the HRI have been stated by author [PERSON] in his novel \"I, Robot\" [2]. The first two fundamentals are as following:  
* A robot may not injure a human being or, through interaction, allow a human to come to harm. * A robot must obey the orders which are given to it by the human beings. Those two mentioned fundamentals above became later the inspiration for the scientific researchers to formulate the main HRI problems. Scientifically speaking, the first fundamental addresses the problem of a safe physical HRI, while the second fundamental addresses the problem of an HRI information communication and control. In industry, a safe physical HRI presented a great focus of study in the last decades [3]. As a result of this focus, a new generation of safe cooperative IRs are now available in the commercial market. Examples of these robots are KUKA lightweight (KUKA Robotics, Augsburg, Germany), Rethink Baxter (Rethink Robotics, Boston, MA, USA), YuMi ABB dual arm (ABB Robotics, Zurich, Switzerland), and Universal Robots (Universal Robots, Odense, Denmark). These IRs apply different technologiesand methodologies to ensure the safe cooperation with the human co-worker [4]. On the contrary, the second HRI fundamental concerns the information control still did not get the proper amount of attention, although it is as much important as the first fundamental. Which motivates us to put more research focus on the second HRI fundamental during this work. The existence of the safe cooperative IR added a new dimension to the flexibility of the RMS [5]. This dimension stems from the fact that the cooperative IR is designed to operate in contact with a co-worker. Putting into consideration that the nature of the cooperative IR is very different form the advanced automatic machines such as the Computer Numerical Control (CNC) machines which can provide a high level of flexibility as well. The first difference is the degree of the cooperation. In case of a cooperative workcell, a real physical cooperation between the IR and the co-worker can be established. While the physical cooperation between a CNC machine and a worker can never happen. The second difference is the degree of flexibility. On the one hand, The CNC machine can manufacture a whole new product from scratch without any direct interference from the worker. The CNC machine high level of flexibility comes with the high cost of the machine hardware and its CAD/CAM software, yet the production volume is very limited. On the other hand, the cooperative IR has to cooperate with the worker to provide the flexibility, however this flexibility can be afforded by a lower cost than the CNC machine and with higher production volume. In other words--in case of the CNC machine--the worker either operates the machine or completes the work of it in another manufacturing stage, this is why the worker never been called a co-worker in case of a CNC machine. Other RMS systems have been studied in [6; 7]. The focus of [6] is to evaluate two different solution approaches to implement the holonic control solution for a modular feeder subsystem of an experimental Reconfigurable Assembly System (RAS). One approach uses the IEC-61499 (IEC: International Electrotechnical Commission) Function Block (FB) technology and the other uses the agent technology. The research does not combine the two technologies together, but it compares them. Then it evaluates them based on the qualitative and quantitative performance of different four hardware configurations for the RAS.