Switched out the old, glued together stack of sensors for a set of c-section parts that allow pressure on the sensor to be independent of the speaker. They keep falling off though.
Trying now with more glue and cure time. I also need to get some double-stick tape.
More glue worked!
Modified the code so that multiple targets can exist and experimented with turning forces off.
Working on constraint code. Got the framework done, but didn’t have enough sleep to be able to do the math involved. So instead I…
Got the actuators mounted on the Phantom! Aside from having one of the force sensors break during mounting, it went pretty smoothly. I may have to adjust the sensitivity of teh sensors so that you don’t have to press so hard on them. At the current setting the voice coils aren’t behaving at higher grip forces. But the ergonomics feel pretty good, so that’s nice.
I think I know what the vibroacoustic study should be. I put an actuator on the Phantom and drive wav files based on the material associated with the collision. I can use the built-in haptic pattern playback as a control. To make the wav files, it might be as simple as recording the word, or using a microphone to contact a material, move across it and lift off (personally, I like this because it mimics what could be done with telepresence. The use of multiple sensor/actuator pairs can be used in a later study.
Which means that I don’t actually need the Phidgets code in the new KF hand codebase. I’m going to include it anyway, simple because I’m so close and can use it later.
Come to think of it, I could put an actuator on a mouse as well and move over materials?
Tasks for today:
- Finish getting the Phidgets code working in KF_Hand_3 – done
- Start to add sound classes – done inasmuch as sounds are loaded and played using the library I wrote. More detail will come later.
- Start to integrate Phantom. Got HelloHapticDevice2 up and running again, as well as quite a few demos
Statistics has always seemed to me stuck in a place that resembles physics before Newton. Lots of pieces that work on their own, but no unifying theory. This drives me crazy, and is probably a reason that there is so much hating on statistics. I discovered Kolmogorov Complexity reading a paper on vacation last week, and wonder if that could be used as a basis for a unified theory of statistics. Here’s a reasonable starting point:
Kolmogorov Complexity – A Primer
which leads to
Information Distance — A Primer
I had an interesting talk with a work buddy about his Master’s program which is Information Security. That led to a rambling discussion on what “trust” and “identity” mean. So what if access to a system was based on an Eliza-like conversation with the computer. There would be an initial “get acquainted” session, and then the “login” conversation would be shorter.
- Store key hit timing and error/correction patterns as well as the words.
- Use a plagerism test to look for cut-and-paste replies from recorded sessions
- Login discussions could be like Capchas in that they could be half test, half learning.
Mostly scrambling to finish a paper, but this looks interesting…
So I have this project that might be a really interesting, though somewhat dark excursion into CSCW. I’m not quite sure what to do with it, but when I hear things like this on Morning Edition, I really wonder if I just shouldn’t figure out a way to go all in. The question is – is a solution that winds up with fewer people getting killed in a war always better?
And here’s something that matters for this: http://securityledger.com/mobile-phone-use-patterns-the-new-fingerprint/. This is the paper the article references: http://www.nature.com/srep/2013/130325/srep01376/fig_tab/srep01376_F1.html
A few more useful links: