4.6 Article

Artificial SA-I and RA-I afferents for tactile sensing of ridges and gratings

期刊

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2021.0822

关键词

touch; robotics; neurophysiology; psychophysics; biomimetics; sensors

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The researchers propose a biomimetic tactile sensor that mimics the transduction principles of human touch, allowing robotic touch to approach the capabilities of human touch. Experiments using this sensor show a match between artificial and natural touch at single neuron, population, and perceptual levels, although natural touch is more sensitive.
For robot touch to reach the capabilities of human touch, artificial tactile sensors may require transduction principles like those of natural tactile afferents. Here we propose that a biomimetic tactile sensor (the TacTip) could provide suitable artificial analogues of the tactile skin dynamics, afferent responses and population encoding. Our three-dimensionally printed sensor skin is based on the physiology of the dermal-epidermal interface with an underlying mesh of biomimetic intermediate ridges and dermal papillae, comprising inner pins tipped with markers. Slowly adapting SA-I activity is modelled by marker displacements and rapidly adapting RA-I activity by marker speeds. We test the biological plausibility of these artificial population codes with three classic experiments used for natural touch: (1a) responses to normal pressure to test adaptation of single afferents and spatial modulation across the population; (1b) responses to bars, edges and gratings to compare with measurements from monkey primary afferents; and (2) discrimination of grating orientation to compare with human perceptual performance. Our results show a match between artificial and natural touch at single afferent, population and perceptual levels. As expected, natural skin is more sensitive, which raises a challenge to fabricate a biomimetic fingertip that demonstrates human sensitivity using the transduction principles of human touch.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据