MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1546774434 · doi:10.1109/whc.2015.7177731

Direct impulse-based rendering in force feedback haptics

2015· article· en· W1546774434 on OpenAlexafffund
Arash Mohtat, József Kövecses

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTeleoperation and Haptic Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRendering (computer graphics)Computer scienceImpulse (physics)Haptic technologyDissipationFidelitySimulationComputer visionPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In certain haptic applications, producing a sharp feeling of impact is important for high-fidelity force feedback rendering of virtual objects. This paper studies the direct impulse-based rendering paradigm to achieve this goal. Three main challenges are identified and some solutions are proposed. The first one is the energy deviation due to the sampled-data settings. Since the deviation tends to have a dissipative nature, it is called unsolicited dissipation and is suggested to be countered by applying a larger adaptive coefficient of restitution based on energy monitoring. The second challenge is the actuation limits which can be met by distributing the impulse into a sequence of force commands over successive intervals. The third is rendering resting contacts which is proposed to be done using a hybrid penalty-impulse-based technique. This paper develops a systematic way for collecting all the required mathematical formulations, analysis of the aforementioned issues and implementation of the solutions within a unified control-oriented framework entitled the generalized contact controller (GCC). Our initial simulation and experimental results show the promising aspects of the direct impulse-based rendering and the GCC framework for generating a sharper unfiltered feeling of impact at relatively low sampling rates compared to virtual coupling-based indirect methods.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.758
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.194 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeleoperation and Haptic SystemsFrench-language works237,207