On Automated Object Grasping for Intelligent Prosthetic Hands Using Machine Learning
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prosthetic technology has witnessed remarkable advancements, yet challenges persist in achieving autonomous grasping control while ensuring the user's experience is not compromised. Current electronic prosthetics often require extensive training for users to gain fine motor control over the prosthetic fingers, hindering their usability and acceptance. To address this challenge and improve the autonomy of prosthetics, this paper proposes an automated method that leverages computer vision-based techniques and machine learning algorithms. In this study, three reinforcement learning algorithms, namely Soft Actor-Critic (SAC), Deep Q-Network (DQN), and Proximal Policy Optimization (PPO), are employed to train agents for automated grasping tasks. The results indicate that the SAC algorithm achieves the highest success rate of 99% among the three algorithms at just under 200,000 timesteps. This research also shows that an object's physical characteristics can affect the agent's ability to learn an optimal policy. Moreover, the findings highlight the potential of the SAC algorithm in developing intelligent prosthetic hands with automatic object-gripping capabilities.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it