Uncanny valley research has shown that human likeness is an important consideration when designing artificial agents. It has separately been shown that artificial agents exhibiting human-like kinematics can elicit positive perceptual responses. However the kinematic characteristics underlying that perception have not been elucidated. This paper proposes kinematic jerk amplitude as a candidate metric for kinematic human likeness, and aims to determine whether a perceptual optimum exists over a range of jerk values. We created minimum-jerk two-digit grasp kinematics in a prosthetic hand model, then added different amplitudes of temporally smooth noise to yield a variety of animations involving different total jerk levels, ranging from maximally smooth to highly jerky. Subjects indicated their perceptual affinity for these animations by simultaneously viewing two different animations side-by-side, first using a laptop, then separately within a virtual reality (VR) environment. Results suggest that (a) subjects generally preferred smoother kinematics, (b) subjects exhibited a small preference for rougher-than minimum jerk kinematics in the laptop experiment, and that (c) the preference for rougher-than minimum-jerk kinematics was amplified in the VR experiment. These results suggest that non-maximally smooth kinematics may be perceptually optimal in robots and other artificial agents.

Grasping is a prototype of human motor coordination. Nevertheless, it is not known what determines the typical movement patterns of grasping. One way to approach this issue is by building models. We developed a model based on the movements of the individual digits. In our model the following objectives were taken into account for each digit: move smoothly to the preselected goal position on the object without hitting other surfaces, arrive at about the same time as the other digit and never move too far from the other digit. These objectives were implemented by regarding the tips of the digits as point masses with a spring between them, each attracted to its goal position and repelled from objects' surfaces. Their movements were damped. Using a single set of parameters, our model can reproduce a wider variety of experimental findings than any previous model of grasping. Apart from reproducing known effects (even the angles under which digits approach trapezoidal objects' surfaces, which no other model can explain), our model predicted that the increase in maximum grip aperture with object size should be greater for blocks than for cylinders. A survey of the literature shows that this is indeed how humans behave. The model can also adequately predict how single digit pointing movements are made. This supports the idea that grasping kinematics follow from the movements of the individual digits.


Digit Kinematics Download


Download File 🔥 https://urlca.com/2y7Z2a 🔥



Human grasping kinematics have certain characteristics. For example, there is a characteristic relation between the maximum distance between the tips of the digits on their way to an object and the size of the object that is to be grasped. Various experiments have been done and models have been made to test specific ideas about why precisely these kinematics emerge. In this study we will focus on the modeling part.

One popular idea, originally suggested by Jeannerod [1], is that the kinematics emerge from transporting the hand (i.e. wrist) toward the target (transport component) and at the same time opening and closing the hand in accordance with the dimensions of the object (grip component). A two-dimensional model based on this idea is presented by Hoff and Arbib [2]. This model consists of three motor activity generators: one for transport of the hand, a second one to preshape the hand and a third one to close the hand at the end of the movement. For the transport generator the constraints are on the hand (the start and end position, velocity and acceleration of the hand). For the preshape generator the constraints are on the aperture (initial and final aperture and aperture velocity). For the enclose generator the constraint is object size. The transport, preshape and enclose generators are coordinated in time. The movement time is preset and is an input for the transport generator. The model has at least 10 parameters that do not follow unambiguously from the constraints.

An alternative view, suggested by Smeets and Brenner, is that the kinematics of the grasping movement follows from the movements of the individual digits [3]. They presented a very simple two-dimensional minimum-jerk model in which the kinematics were determined by the constraints on the individual digits at the start and end of the movement. As in the model of Hoff and Arbib, movement time is preset. In addition to the movement time, the model has only one parameter that does not follow from the constraints: the approach parameter.

In order to better test the origins of grasping kinematics we developed a model that is able to deal with obstacles and online corrections. We based our model on the view of Smeets and Brenner [3] that kinematics of grasping movements follow from moving each digit to its goal position. When building a model one can impose constraints that are fulfilled by definition. It is also possible to implement objectives for which the extent to which they influence the movement depends on the situation. The minimum jerk model is only based on constraints. This makes it virtually impossible to model objectives such as avoiding collisions with other digits or obstacles. We therefore chose to build a new model that combines task constraints with objectives such as to avoid collisions.

This model based on the forces Fa, Fr, Fs and Fd, has a close similarity with the potential field methods that are quite popular in on-line collision avoidance for robot manipulators. In these methods, the robot follows the gradient of a potential field consisting of attractive potentials due to the goal positions, repulsive potentials due to obstacles, and repulsive potentials due to joint limits [24]. Although virtual forces are used to calculate the trajectories of the tips, our model gives no predictions regarding forces exerted by the digits (let alone the muscles).

The overall aim of this study was to test the credibility of the view that grasping kinematics are determined by the movements of the individual digits to their goal positions. Based on a comparison of experimental outcomes with model predictions this view indeed seems credible.

The results of our model are not very sensitive to the exact choice of the parameter values, but they are sensitive enough to be able to generate different movements for different circumstances (see sensitivity analysis in methods section). Varying the values could be used to simulate differences between subjects and between trials, and to fit the model to data for specific circumstances. We choose to keep the parameters constant for all simulations in the results section to show that the observed features arise from our approach (formulating constraints and objectives for the digits and converting them to movements) rather than from fitting appropriate parameters. Thus, we do not claim that the selected values for the parameters are the best for reproducing any of the data that we consider. Moreover, we expect that the measures that they represent do actually differ across conditions and experiments. The comparison of our model predictions to experimental findings will therefore be largely qualitative.

In order to choose values for our model parameters, we simulated one of the grasping movements studied by Jeannerod [1]: a grasping movement to a 10 cm high rod with a diameter of 2 mm placed on a table 40 cm in front of the digits. In the simulations we placed the goal positions at a height of 5 cm on the rod and at an angle of 30 degrees in the horizontal plane (where 0 degrees is a final grip orthogonal to the direction from the starting point to the object's centre). The table was modeled as a horizontal surface (60 cm30 cm).

The resulting position and velocity profiles of the tips are depicted in Fig. 1. The tips move higher than the final grasping points and then descend to grasp the rod. The velocity profile is approximately bell-shaped. Maximum velocity (MV) and MGA occur at the same time. MV is 0.99 m/s. The movement time (MT) is 0.73 s. This is in accordance with the findings of Jeannerod, who found that the digits move higher than the final grasping points and then descend to grasp the rod with an approximately bell-shaped velocity profile. In Jeannerod's study MT varied across subjects. Mean MT ranged between 0.72 s in the fastest subject and 1.18 s in the slowest. MV varied between 0.80 m/s and 1.35 m/s. The time difference between MV and MGA was 80 ms or less for all subjects [1]. Note that the fact that the model matched these experimental observations is not a coincidence, because the values of the parameters (table 1) were chosen to achieve this.

We consider the ability to deal with perturbations to be an essential aspect of a model of grasping kinematics [2], [70]. Paulignan et al. [71] examined prehension movements in which the diameter of a target cylinder changed at movement onset. They found that grip aperture was affected by the perturbation. When the target diameter increased from 1.5 cm to 6 cm they found two stages in the increase in grip aperture (an early peak around 40% of MT and a second peak around 70%, see Fig. 7). The height of the first peak corresponded to the MGA observed in control trials in which the target diameter was 1.5 cm and the height of the second peak corresponded to the MGA observed in control trials in which the target diameter was 6 cm. They report that the distinction between the two peaks was not as clear for all subjects.

We simulated grasping movements to cylinders with the same dimensions as those of the experiment of Paulignan et al. In two simulations the diameter was constant, either 1.5 cm or 6 cm and in two simulations the diameter changed, either from 1.5 cm to 6 cm or from 6 cm to 1.5 cm. The initial distance between the digits and the target was equal to the distance in their experiment (35 cm). The cylinders were grasped at an angle of 30 degrees in the horizontal plane. Humans respond to changes in the diameter with some latency. We obtained realistic trajectories if we changed the virtual target 400 ms after the perturbation. 006ab0faaa

no new friends song download

download kiwi log server

unimath bold font free download

aslay ft osama homa mp3 download

scratch download for ipad free