MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4390823540 · doi:10.1145/3631449

Laser-Powered Vibrotactile Rendering

2023· article· en· W4390823540 on OpenAlexaff
Yuning Su, Yuhua Jin, Zhengqing Wang, Yonghao Shi, Da-Yuan Huang, Teng Han, Xing-Dong Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous Technologies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicTactile and Sensory Interactions
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceRendering (computer graphics)ActuatorVibrationDC motorDigital pattern generatorLaserGenerator (circuit theory)Wireless power transferHaptic technologyAutomotive engineeringWirelessSimulationPower (physics)AcousticsElectrical engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We investigate the feasibility of a vibrotactile device that is both battery-free and electronic-free. Our approach leverages lasers as a wireless power transfer and haptic control mechanism, which can drive small actuators commonly used in AR/VR and mobile applications with DC or AC signals. To validate the feasibility of our method, we developed a proof-of-concept prototype that includes low-cost eccentric rotating mass (ERM) motors and linear resonant actuators (LRAs) connected to photovoltaic (PV) cells. This prototype enabled us to capture laser energy from any distance across a room and analyze the impact of critical parameters on the effectiveness of our approach. Through a user study, testing 16 different vibration patterns rendered using either a single motor or two motors, we demonstrate the effectiveness of our approach in generating vibration patterns of comparable quality to a baseline, which rendered the patterns using a signal generator.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the ACM on Interactive Mobile Wearable and Ubiquitous TechnologiesSame topicTactile and Sensory InteractionsFrench-language works237,207