MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138956297 · doi:10.1109/cdc.2006.377163

Multi-rate Control Architectures for Dextrous Haptic Rendering in Cooperative Virtual Environments

2006· article· en· W2138956297 on OpenAlexafffund
Mahyar Fotoohi, Shahin Sirouspour, David W. Capson

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTeleoperation and Haptic Systems
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHaptic technologyComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)Virtual realityHuman–computer interactionComputer graphics (images)MultimediaSimulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper is concerned with haptic simulation in multi-user virtual environments in which the users can haptically interact in a shared virtual world from separate workstations over an Ethernet local-area Network (LAN). High-fidelity haptic rendering requires a minimum control update rate of 1000Hz which is beyond the capability of popular network protocols such as the UDP and TCP/IP. Consequently, a multi-rate control strategy is adopted in which local force-feedback loops are executed at higher rates than data packet transmission between the user workstations. Two control architectures, i.e. centralized and distributed, are presented and their stability margins are compared. Two methods for mathematical modelling and analysis of the proposed multi-rate haptic control systems are examined. Analytical and experimental results demonstrate that the distributed control architecture is superior to the centralized controller from performance and stability perspectives. This is confirmed through experiments with a dual-user dual-finger haptic rendering platform.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations8
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeleoperation and Haptic SystemsFrench-language works237,207