MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034203039 · doi:10.1109/haptics.2008.4479948

Perceptual Rendering for Learning Haptic Skills

2008· article· en· W2034203039 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy Edmunds, Dinesh K. Pai

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTeleoperation and Haptic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRendering (computer graphics)Computer scienceHaptic technologyPerceptionHigh fidelityHuman–computer interactionFidelityCollision detectionSalientArtificial intelligenceSimulationCollisionComputer visionPsychologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We approach the problem of creating haptic simulators that effectively impart skill without requiring high-fidelity devices by identifying perceptually salient events that signal transitions in the interaction. By augmenting these events, we seek to overcome deficiencies in the fidelity of the rendering hardware. We present an extension of event-based haptic rendering to non- collision events, and we describe a user-study of the training effectiveness of passive force-field haptic simulation vs. active event- augmented simulation in a tool-manipulation task. The results indicate that active augmentation improves skill transfer without requiring an increase in the quality of the rendering device.

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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.418
Threshold uncertainty score0.336

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.209
Teacher spread0.191 · 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

Citations10
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeleoperation and Haptic SystemsFrench-language works237,207