Data-Driven Representation of Soft Deformable Objects Based on Force-Torque Data and 3D Vision Measurements
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The realistic representation of deformations is still an active area of research, especially for soft objects whose behavior cannot be simply described in terms of elasticity parameters. Most of existing techniques assume that the parameters describing the object behavior are known a priori based on assumptions on the object material, such as its isotropy or linearity, or values for these parameters are chosen by manual tuning until the results seem plausible. This is a subjective process and cannot be employed where accuracy is expected. This paper proposes a data-driven neural-network-based model for capturing implicitly deformations of a soft object, without requiring any knowledge on the object material. Visual data, in form of 3D point clouds gathered by a Kinect sensor, is collected over an object while forces are exerted by means of the probing tip of a force-torque sensor. A novel approach advantageously combining distance-based clustering, stratified sampling and neural gas-tuned mesh simplification is then proposed to describe the particularities of the deformation. The representation is denser in the region of the deformation (an average of 97% perceptual similarity with the collected data in the deformed area), while still preserving the object overall shape (74% similarity over the entire surface) and only using on average 30% of the number of vertices in the mesh.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".