Gentle versus strong touch classification: Preliminary results, challenges, and potentials

5Citations
Citations of this article
18Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Touch plays a crucial role in humans’ nonverbal social and affective communication. It then comes as no surprise to observe a considerable effort that has been placed on devising methodologies for automated touch classification. For instance, such an ability allows for the use of smart touch sensors in such real-life application domains as socially-assistive robots and embodied telecommunication. In fact, touch classification literature represents an undeniably progressive result. However, these results are limited in two important ways. First, they are mostly based on overall (i.e., average) accuracy of different classifiers. As a result, they fall short in providing an insight on performance of these approaches as per different types of touch. Second, they do not consider the same type of touch with different level of strength (e.g., gentle versus strong touch). This is certainly an important factor that deserves investigating since the intensity of a touch can utterly transform its meaning (e.g., from an affectionate gesture to a sign of punishment). The current study provides a preliminary investigation of these shortcomings by considering the accuracy of a number of classifiers for both, within- (i.e., same type of touch with differing strengths) and between-touch (i.e., different types of touch) classifications. Our results help verify the strength and shortcoming of different machine learning algorithms for touch classification. They also highlight some of the challenges whose solution concepts can pave the path for integration of touch sensors in such application domains as human-robot interaction (HRI).

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Keshmiri, S., Shiomi, M., Sumioka, H., Minato, T., & Ishiguro, H. (2020). Gentle versus strong touch classification: Preliminary results, challenges, and potentials. Sensors (Switzerland), 20(11). https://doi.org/10.3390/s20113033

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free