Bibliographic record
Abstract
The design of any physical product involves prototyping. Building physical prototypes of the products can be expensive and time consuming. An alternate to physical prototyping is haptic virtual prototyping, which simulates the product using a computer and a haptic device. A haptic device is one that produces the forces similar to that of the product, giving the user a realistic feel of the product. Since the feel of a product plays a significant role in its commercial success, the importance of haptic virtual prototyping as a design tool is increasing. This paper discusses the haptic simulation of a push button on a low cost and commercially available haptic device called Novint Falcon. Two different models were created – the first one was a simple push button, and the second was an on/off click button. The parameters of the two models were selected such that they have the most accurate tactile response or feel of the product. The two models successfully simulated the feel of the buttons, and it was found that haptic virtual prototyping of buttons is achievable using a low cost haptic interaction system.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".