MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2963945072 · doi:10.1109/lra.2019.2931221

Haptic Interface for Handshake Emulation

2019· article· en· W2963945072 on OpenAlexafffund
Jonathan Beaudoin, Thierry Laliberté, Clément Gosselin

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicMotor Control and Adaptation
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHandshakeHaptic technologyTrajectoryInterface (matter)Impedance controlSimulationHexapodComputer scienceStiffnessEmulationRobotControl theory (sociology)EngineeringControl (management)Artificial intelligenceAsynchronous communicationPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This letter introduces a prototype of a haptic interface designed to produce a realistic human-robot handshake. Inspired by the human hand anatomy, a new robotic hand designed to achieve a realistic palm compliance and finger grasping is presented. As the system is backdrivable, a position-controlled feedback loop is implemented to render a human-like hand behavior. The overall arm motion is achieved through a collaborative serial manipulator. This manipulator uses an impedance control around a sinusoidal trajectory to simulate its intention or personality. Improved from the design proposed by the authors in previous work, the new prototype is easier to use, more efficient, more robust, and more comfortable with an active arm behavior. Experiments are then performed to determine the impact of different trajectory parameters, such as frequency, amplitude, and damping and stiffness coefficients, on the perceived realism of the handshake. It is shown that the amplitude has no impact in the range studied (10 to 30mm), while a frequency of approximately 2 Hz is preferred. Ranges of values of the damping and stiffness coefficients yielding the best results are also determined. The experiments also allow the identification of potential improvements to be implemented on the prototype in the future.

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: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicMotor Control and AdaptationFrench-language works237,207