Force Myography-Based Human Robot Interactions via Deep Domain Adaptation and Generalization
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Estimating applied force using force myography (FMG) technique can be effective in human-robot interactions (HRI) using data-driven models. A model predicts well when adequate training and evaluation are observed in same session, which is sometimes time consuming and impractical. In real scenarios, a pretrained transfer learning model predicting forces quickly once fine-tuned to target distribution would be a favorable choice and hence needs to be examined. Therefore, in this study a unified supervised FMG-based deep transfer learner (SFMG-DTL) model using CNN architecture was pretrained with multiple sessions FMG source data (Ds, Ts) and evaluated in estimating forces in separate target domains (Dt, Tt) via supervised domain adaptation (SDA) and supervised domain generalization (SDG). For SDA, case (i) intra-subject evaluation (Ds ≠ Dt-SDA, Ts ≈ Tt-SDA) was examined, while for SDG, case (ii) cross-subject evaluation (Ds ≠ Dt-SDG, Ts ≠ Tt-SDG) was examined. Fine tuning with few “target training data” calibrated the model effectively towards target adaptation. The proposed SFMG-DTL model performed better with higher estimation accuracies and lower errors (R2 ≥ 88%, NRMSE ≤ 0.6) in both cases. These results reveal that interactive force estimations via transfer learning will improve daily HRI experiences where “target training data” is limited, or faster adaptation is required.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".