Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Robotic automation of vehicle refueling and charging stations is an emerging enabler of sustainable transportation, but the relevant platforms are studied in disconnected communities. This review compares two evidence-based platform families (fixed and mobile manipulator arms) and two emerging candidates (humanoid and quadruped robots) across EV conductive charging, EV wireless charging with actuated alignment, hydrogen refueling, and battery swapping. A PRISMA-inspired search with record-level screening retained 84 studies from 194 records, complemented by 58 targeted references, including standards. Claims are graded by directness and by study quality and independence, and Technology Readiness Levels separate verifiable evidence from vendor disclosures. Connector-insertion studies report 90–100% success over 10–50 trials, without retry policies or final engagement errors. Verifiable evidence supports TRL 8 for robotic battery swapping, TRL 6 for robotic EV charging, and TRL 5 for hydrogen refueling. No study of humanoid or quadruped refueling was identified within the search scope. Rule-based scoring with sensitivity analysis supports fixed Ex-rated arms for hydrogen, robotic bays for swapping, and fixed arms for EV charging, the latter pending a head-to-head comparison with mobile arms. Seven technological and normative gaps, including cybersecurity, are linked to a validation agenda and a rule-ranked research roadmap.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Infantino et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: