MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1966206687 · doi:10.1109/epe.2013.6631958

A method to HARvest energy from a hapTIC display in a handheld device: A preliminary study

2013· preprint· en· W1966206687 on OpenAlexaff
Frédéric Giraud, F.P. Dawson, Christophe Giraud-Audine, Michel Amberg, Betty Lemaire‐Semail

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMobile deviceHaptic technologyAccelerometerComputer scienceMobile phoneActuatorEnergy harvestingEnergy (signal processing)Generator (circuit theory)Mode (computer interface)Digital pattern generatorDisplay deviceElectricityKey (lock)SimulationHuman–computer interactionEngineeringElectrical engineeringArtificial intelligencePower (physics)Telecommunications

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper deals with the control of a haptic device which is used in a generator mode to produce electricity from a user's walking movements in a handheld device, like a mobile phone for instance. We first present the design principle of such a device. Then, a design is presented, which allows haptic feedback and energy harvesting to be produced with a same device. It is based on a piezoelectric plate actuator. A causal modelling of the system is then developed, and inverted in order to obtain the key control algorithms. Compared to other energy harvesting system, HarTic is characterized by some interesting features like the accelerometer which is now embedded into most mobile phones, and its measurement can be used in the energy harvesting strategy. Our simulations show that 2mW can be harversted in our case study.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.287 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207