MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2619706669 · doi:10.3390/s17061187

Multimodal Bio-Inspired Tactile Sensing Module for Surface Characterization

2017· article· en· W2619706669 on OpenAlexafffund
Thiago Eustaquio Alves de Oliveira, Ana-Maria Creţu, Emil M. Petriu

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting Materials
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCiência sem FronteirasNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMinistério da Educação
KeywordsCharacterization (materials science)Computer scienceHuman–computer interactionBiomimeticsBiomimetic materialsTactile sensorNanotechnologyArtificial intelligenceComputer visionMaterials scienceRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Robots are expected to recognize the properties of objects in order to handle them safely and efficiently in a variety of applications, such as health and elder care, manufacturing, or high-risk environments. This paper explores the issue of surface characterization by monitoring the signals acquired by a novel bio-inspired tactile probe in contact with ridged surfaces. The tactile module comprises a nine Degree of Freedom Microelectromechanical Magnetic, Angular Rate, and Gravity system (9-DOF MEMS MARG) and a deep MEMS pressure sensor embedded in a compliant structure that mimics the function and the organization of mechanoreceptors in human skin as well as the hardness of the human skin. When the modules tip slides over a surface, the MARG unit vibrates and the deep pressure sensor captures the overall normal force exerted. The module is evaluated in two experiments. The first experiment compares the frequency content of the data collected in two setups: one when the module is mounted over a linear motion carriage that slides four grating patterns at constant velocities; the second when the module is carried by a robotic finger in contact with the same grating patterns while performing a sliding motion, similar to the exploratory motion employed by humans to detect object roughness. As expected, in the linear setup, the magnitude spectrum of the sensors' output shows that the module can detect the applied stimuli with frequencies ranging from 3.66 Hz to 11.54 Hz with an overall maximum error of ±0.1 Hz. The second experiment shows how localized features extracted from the data collected by the robotic finger setup over seven synthetic shapes can be used to classify them. The classification method consists on applying multiscale principal components analysis prior to the classification with a multilayer neural network. Achieved accuracies from 85.1% to 98.9% for the various sensor types demonstrate the usefulness of traditional MEMS as tactile sensors embedded into flexible substrates.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations35
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicAdvanced Sensor and Energy Harvesting MaterialsFrench-language works237,207