A Polymeric Piezoelectric Tactile Sensor Fabricated by 3D Printing and Laser Micromachining for Hardness Differentiation during Palpation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tactile sensors are important bionic microelectromechanical systems that are used to implement an artificial sense of touch for medical electronics. Compared with the natural sense of touch, this artificial sense of touch provides more quantitative information, augmenting the objective aspects of several medical operations, such as palpation-based diagnosis. Tactile sensors can be effectively used for hardness differentiation during the palpation process. Since palpation requires direct physical contact with patients, medical safety concerns are alleviated if the sensors used can be made disposable. In this respect, the low-cost, rapid fabrication of tactile sensors based on polymers is a possible alternative. The present work uses the 3D printing of elastic resins and the laser micromachining of piezoelectric polymeric films to make a low-cost tactile sensor for hardness differentiation through palpation. The fabricated tactile sensor has a sensitivity of 1.52 V/mm to mechanical deformation at the vertical direction, a sensitivity of 11.72 mV/HA in sensing material hardness with a pressing depth of 500 µm for palpation, and a validated capability to detect rigid objects buried in a soft tissue phantom. Its performance is comparable with existing piezoelectric tactile sensors for similar applications. In addition, the tactile sensor has the additional advantage of providing a simpler microfabrication process.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".