Tactile synthesis and perceptual inverse problems seen from the viewpoint of contact mechanics
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A contact-mechanics analysis was used to explain a tactile illusion engendered by straining the fingertip skin tangentially in a progressive wave pattern resulting in the perception of a moving undulating surface. We derived the strain tensor field induced by a sinusoidal surface sliding on a finger as well as the field created by a tactile transducer array deforming the fingerpad skin by lateral traction. We found that the first field could be well approximated by the second. Our results have several implications. First, tactile displays using lateral skin deformation can generate tactile sensations similar to those using normal skin deformation. Second, a synthesis approach can achieve this result if some constraints on the design of tactile stimulators are met. Third, the mechanoreceptors embedded in the skin must respond to the deviatoric part of the strain tensor field and not to its volumetric part. Finally, many tactile stimuli might represent, for the brain, an inverse problem to be solved, such specific examples of “tactile metameres” are given.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it