Design, Sensing and Control of a Robotic Prosthetic Eye for Natural Eye Movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Loss of an eye is a tragedy for a person, who may suffer psychologically and physically. This paper is concerned with the design, sensing and control of a robotic prosthetic eye that moves horizontally in synchronization with the movement of the natural eye. Two generations of robotic prosthetic eye models have been developed. The first generation model uses an external infrared sensor array mounted on the frame of a pair of eyeglasses to detect the natural eye movement and to feed the control system to drive the artificial eye to move with the natural eye. The second generation model removes the impractical usage of the eye glass frame and uses the human brain EOG (electro‐ocular‐graph) signal picked up by electrodes placed on the sides of a person′s temple to carry out the same eye movement detection and control tasks as mentioned above. Theoretical issues on sensor failure detection and recovery, and signal processing techniques used in sensor data fusion, are studied using statistical methods and artificial neural network based techniques. In addition, practical control system design and implementation using micro‐controllers are studied and implemented to carry out the natural eye movement detection and artificial robotic eye control tasks. Simulation and experimental studies are performed, and the results are included to demonstrate the effectiveness of the research project reported in this paper.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".