Mixels: Fabricating Interfaces using Programmable Magnetic Pixels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we present Mixels, programmable magnetic pixels that can be rapidly fabricated using an electromagnetic printhead mounted on an off-the-shelve 3-axis CNC machine. The ability to program magnetic material pixel-wise with varying magnetic force enables Mixels to create new tangible, tactile, and haptic interfaces. To facilitate the creation of interactive objects with Mixels, we provide a user interface that lets users specify the high-level magnetic behavior and that then computes the underlying magnetic pixel assignments and fabrication instructions to program the magnetic surface. Our custom hardware add-on based on an electromagnetic printhead and hall effect sensor clips onto a standard 3-axis CNC machine and can both write and read magnetic pixel values from magnetic material. Our evaluation shows that our system can reliably program and read magnetic pixels of various strengths, that we can predict the behavior of two interacting magnetic surfaces before programming them, that our electromagnet is strong enough to create pixels that utilize the maximum magnetic strength of the material being programmed, and that this material remains magnetized when removed from the magnetic plotter.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".