MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2558221296 · doi:10.1109/iemcon.2016.7746233

Proposed design of a Motorized Force Feedback haptics Device with Rotary Joint Module and spherical friction clutch

2016· article· en· W2558221296 on OpenAlexaff
Garg Anupam, Bikramvir Singh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTeleoperation and Haptic Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHaptic technologyProcess (computing)Computer scienceHuman–computer interactionClutchInterface (matter)RoboticsSimulationRobotArtificial intelligenceEngineeringMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Haptic technology is a concept-based technology, which helps the user to interface with a device via the sense of touch. The user applies force, create vibrations and give motion with the help of the haptic device. So haptic devices can be put into the category of input devices that works on the principle of force feedback. The main applications where an educational haptic device can be used are the areas where there is a hands-on nature experiments are there. With the help of force feedback devices, it is possible to get the attention of learners in a more compelling way to get involved into the learning process. It also helps to build the underscores connection between science, technology, engineering, mathematical theory and physical reality. Haptic devices, which are used to implement force feedback, are programmed to generate physical interactions that help the learners to improve practical knowledge about their scientific and mathematical areas. Haptic devices can also help to generate the requirement, which can be further extended for interdisciplinary robotics education. IT can be a source of inspiration for very young students to explore these areas at length. In this research paper, we have proposed a design for a haptic device, which is based on motorized mechanism and has a friction clutch. This haptic device can be used to make the learning process better and convenient.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.877
Threshold uncertainty score0.254

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeleoperation and Haptic SystemsFrench-language works237,207