| Literature DB >> 25536002 |
Carlos A Perez-Ramirez1, Dora L Almanza-Ojeda2, Jesus N Guerrero-Tavares3, Francisco J Mendoza-Galindo4, Julian M Estudillo-Ayala5, Mario A Ibarra-Manzano6.
Abstract
The implementation of signal filters in a real-time form requires a tradeoff between computation resources and the system performance. Therefore, taking advantage of low lag response and the reduced consumption of resources, in this article, the Recursive Least Square (RLS) algorithm is used to filter a signal acquired from a fiber-optics-based sensor. In particular, a Long-Period Fiber Grating (LPFG) sensor is used to measure the bending movement of a finger. After that, the Gaussian Mixture Model (GMM) technique allows us to classify the corresponding finger position along the motion range. For these measures to help in the development of an autonomous robotic hand, the proposed technique can be straightforwardly implemented on real time platforms such as Field Programmable Gate Array (FPGA) or Digital Signal Processors (DSP). Different angle measurements of the finger's motion are carried out by the prototype and a detailed analysis of the system performance is presented.Entities:
Year: 2014 PMID: 25536002 PMCID: PMC4299122 DOI: 10.3390/s141224483
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.Sensor behavior: (a) the response to mechanical action; (b) linearity without filter; (c) linearity with filter.
Figure 2.Proposed System block diagram.
Figure 3.Real-time filter form implementation.
Figure 4.GMM implementation.
Figure 5.Experimental setup. Left: The LFPG sensor adapted to one finger; Right: First plane shows the handmade fingers connected to the LFPG sensor in a human hand.
Figure 6.GF effects on (a) the filter lag and (b) the filter tracking.
Figure 7.GF Effects in the GMM. (a) GF = 4 (b) GF = 8 (c) GF = 16 (d) GF Effects on the GMM of 0 degree.
Confusion matrix of the detected angles using the GMM model.
| 0° | 97% | 3% | 0% |
| 22.5° | 0.8% | 86.6% | 12.6% |
| 45° | 0% | 10.4% | 89.4% |
Analysis comparative of seven sensor features and the lineal model for the proposed sensor and three more sensors proposed in the literature (--- means that the corresponding data is not provided by the authors).
| Accuracy of Angle [deg.] | 2.2925 | 1.9587 | 1.6692 | 0.6800 | 2.0000 | --- | --- |
| Sensitivity | 0.8422 V | 0.8470 V | 0.8527 V | 0.9400 dB | --- | 0.1970 dBm | 0.6400 dBm |
| Standard Deviation [%] | 0.2584 | 0.1600 | 0.1476 | 0.7000 | --- | 0.80 | 1.00 |
| Measurements Response Time | 10 μs | 100 μs | 100 μs | --- | 31 ms–500 μs | ∼100 ms | ∼100 ms |
| Real Time Processing | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| R-Square (R2) | 0.9639 | 0.9710 | 0.9804 | --- | --- | 0.9630 | 0.9890 |
| Adjusted R-Square (a-R2) | 0.9635 | 0.9706 | 0.9801 | --- | 0.9993 | --- | --- |
| Root Mean Squared Error (RMSE) | 2.5288 | 2.2694 | 1.8651 | --- | --- | --- | --- |