Real-time vibrotactile pattern generation and identification using discrete event-driven feedback

References

• Aboseria M, Clemente F, Engels LF, Cipriani C. 2018. Discrete vibro-tactile feedback prevents object slippage in hand prostheses more intuitively than other modalities. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 26(8):1577–1584.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Amano H. 2018. Principles and structures of FPGAs. Singapore: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Antfolk C, Björkman A, Frank SO, Sebelius F, Lundborg G, Rosen B. 2012. Sensory feedback from a prosthetic hand based on air-mediated pressure from the hand to the forearm skin. J Rehabil Med. 44(8):702–707.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antfolk C, Balkenius C, Lundborg G, Rosén B, Sebelius F. 2010. A tactile display system for hand prostheses to discriminate pressure and individual finger localization. J Med Biol Eng. 30(6):355–360.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Antfolk C, D'Alonzo M, Rosén B, Lundborg G, Sebelius F, Cipriani C. 2013. Sensory feedback in upper limb prosthetics. Expert Rev Med Devices. 10(1):45–54.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Biddiss E, Chau T. 2007. Upper-limb prosthetics: critical factors in device abandonment. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 86(12):977–987.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown SD, Francis RJ, Rose J, Vranesic ZG. 1992. Field-programmable gate arrays. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Chatterjee A, Chaubey P, Martin J, Thakor N. 2008. Testing a prosthetic haptic feedback simulator with an interactive force matching task. JPO. 20(2):27–34.
   Google Scholar
• Cholewiak RW, Craig JC. 1984. Vibrotactile pattern recognition and discrimination at several body sites. Percept Psychophys. 35(6):503–514.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Cipriani C, D'Alonzo M, Carrozza MC. 2012. A miniature vibrotactile sensory substitution device for multifingered hand prosthetics. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 59(2):400–408.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cipriani C, Segil JL, Clemente F, Ff Weir RF, Edin B.,. 2014. Humans can integrate feedback of discrete events in their sensorimotor control of a robotic hand. Exp Brain Res. 232(11):3421–3429.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clemente F, D’Alonzo M, Controzzi M, Edin BB, Cipriani C. 2016. Non-invasive, temporally discrete feedback of object contact and release improves grasp control of closed-loop my- oelectric transradial prostheses. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 24(12):1314–1322.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Crossley J. 2021. Functional exercise and rehabilitation: the neuroscience of movement, pain and performance. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Dhillon GS, Horch KW. 2005. Direct neural sensory feedback and control of a prosthetic arm. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 13(4):468–472.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dietrich C, Walter-Walsh K, Preissler S, Hofmann GO, Witte OW, Miltner WHR, Weiss T. 2012. Sensory feedback prosthesis reduces phantom limb pain: proof of a principle. Neurosci Lett. 507(2):97–100.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dosen S, Schaeffer MC, Farina D. 2014. Time-division multiplexing for myoelectric closed-loop control using electrotactile feedback. J Neuroeng Rehabil. 11:138.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erbaş İ, Vargas DA, Güçlü B. 2020. FPGA implementation of multinomial logistic regression for vibrotactile feedback in a robotic hand. In: Costin H editor. 2020 E-Health and Bioengineering Conference (EHB), IEEE, Iaşi, Romania, pp 1–4.
   Google Scholar
• Flanagan JR, Bowman MC, Johansson RS. 2006. Control strategies in object manipulation tasks. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 16(6):650–659.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gescheider G, Migel N. 1995. Some temporal parameters in vibrotactile forward masking. J Acoust Soc Am. 98(6):3195–3199.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gescheider GA, Güçlü B, Sexton JL, Karalunas S, Fontana A. 2005. Spatial summation in the tactile sensory system: probability summation and neural integration. Somatosens Mot Res. 22(4):255–268.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gescheider GA, Wright JH, Verrillo RT. 2010. Information-processing channels in the tactile sensory system: a psychophysical and physiological analysis. New York: Psychology Press.
   Google Scholar
• Güçlü B, Bolanowski SJ. 2005. Vibrotactile thresholds of the non-Pacinian I channel: I. methodological issues. Somatosens Motor Res. 22(1–2):49–56.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Güçlü B editor. 2021. Somatosensory feedback for neuroprosthetics. London: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• James G, Witten D, Hastie T, Tibshirani R. 2013. An introduction to statistical learning. New York: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Johansson RS, Edin BB. 1993. Predictive feed-forward sensory control during grasping and manipulation in man. Biomed Res. 14:95–95.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johansson RS, Flanagan JR. 2009. Coding and use of tactile signals from the fingertips in object manipulation tasks. Nat Rev Neurosci. 10(5):345–359.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaczmarek KA, Webster JG, Bach-y-Rita P, Tompkins WJ. 1991. Electrotactile and vibrotactile displays for sensory substitution systems. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 38(1):1–16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaczmarek KA, Tyler ME, Brisben AJ. 2000. The afferent neural response to electrotactile stimuli: preliminary results. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 8(2):268–270.
   Google Scholar
• Karakuş İ. 2020. Psychophysical evaluation of a sensory feedback system for proshetic hands [unpublished dissertation]. İstanbul, Turkey: Boğaziçi University.
   Google Scholar
• Karakuş İ, Güçlü B. 2020. Psychophysical principles of discrete event-driven vibrotactile feedback for prostheses. Somatosens Mot Res. 37(3):186–203.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Karakuş ŞH, Atasoy A, Kaplanoğlu E, Özkan M, Güçlü B. 2018. Evaluation of sensory feedback from a robotic hand: a preliminary study. In: Prattichizzo D, et al. editors. EuroHaptics 2018. Haptics: science, technology, and applications. Cham, Switzerland: Springer, pp 452–463.
   Google Scholar
• Li K, Boyd P, Zhou Y, Ju Z, Liu H. 2018. Electrotactile feedback in a virtual hand rehabilitation platform: evaluation and implementation. IEEE Trans Autom Sci Eng. 16(4):1556–1565.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makous JC, Gescheider GA, Bolanowski SJ. 1996a. Decay in the effect of vibrotactile masking. J Acoust Soc Am. 99(2):1124–1129.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Makous JC, Gescheider GA, Bolanowski SJ. 1996b. The effects of static indentation on vibro-tactile threshold. J Acoust Soc Am. 99(5):3149–3153.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mann RW, Reimers SD. 1970. Kinesthetic sensing for the EMG controlled ‘Boston Arm’. IEEE Trans Man Mach Syst. 11(1):110–115.
   Google Scholar
• Mastinu E, Engels LF, Clemente F, Dione M, Sassu P, Aszmann O, Brånemark R, Håkansson B, Controzzi M, Wessberg J, et al. 2020. Neural feedback strategies to improve grasping coordination in neuromusculoskeletal prostheses. Sci Rep. 10(1):11793.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Micera S, Carpaneto J, Raspopovic S. 2010. Control of hand prostheses using peripheral in-formation. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng. 3:48–68.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Narayanan R, Honbo D, Memik G, Choudhary A, Zambreno J. 2007. An FPGA implementation of decision tree classification. In: Lauwereins R editor. 2007 Design, Automation & Test in Europe, IEEE, Nice, France, pp 1–6.
   Google Scholar
• Oberg J, Eguro K, Bittner R, Forin A. 2012. Random decision tree body part recognition using FPGAs. In: Torresen j (ed) 22nd International Conference on Field Programmable Logic and Applications (FPL), Oslo, Norway, pp 330–337.
   Google Scholar
• Patterson PE, Katz JA. 1992. Design and evaluation of a sensory feedback system that provides grasping pressure in a myoelectric hand. J Rehabil Res Develop. 29(1):1–8.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Peddamatham S, Peine W, Tan HZ. 2008. Assessment of vibrotactile feedback in a needle-insertion task using a surgical robot. In: Weisenberger J, Okamura A, MacLean K editor. 2008 Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, IEEE, Reno, Nevada, USA, pp 93–99.
   Google Scholar
• Pedregosa F, Varoquaux G, Gramfort A, Michel V, Thirion B, Grisel O, Blondel M, Prettenhofer P, Weiss R, Dubourg V. 2011. Scikit-learn: machine learning in python. J Mach Learn Res. 12:2825–2830.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pittman N, Forin A, Criminisi A, Shotton J, Mahram A. 2013. Image segmentation using hardware forest classifiers. In: Eguro K editor. 2013 IEEE 21st Annual International Symposium on Field-Programmable Custom Computing Machines, Seattle, Washington, USA, pp 73–80.
   Google Scholar
• Poveda AR. 2002. Myoelectric prostheses with sensorial feedback. In: Bush G, Englehart K editor. University of New Brunswick’s MyoElectric Controls/Powered Prosthetics Symposium, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada, pp 73–80.
   Google Scholar
• Pylatiuk C, Kargov A, Schulz S. 2006. Design and evaluation of a low-cost force feedback system for myoelectric prosthetic hands. JPO. 18(2):57–61.
   Google Scholar
• Raspopovic S, Capogrosso M, Petrini FM, Bonizzato M, Rigosa J, Di Pino G, Carpaneto J, Controzzi M, Boretius T, Fernandez E, et al. 2014. Restoring natural sensory feedback in real-time bidirectional hand prostheses. Sci Transl Med. 6(222):222ra19–222ra19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodríguez-Andina JJ, Valdes-Pena MD, Moure MJ. 2015. Advanced features and industrial applications of FPGAs—a review. IEEE Trans Ind Informat. 11(4):853–864.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saunders I, Vijayakumar S. 2011. The role of feed-forward and feedback processes for closed-loop prosthesis control. J NeuroEng Rehabil. 8(1):1–12.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Schofield JS, Evans KR, Carey JP, Hebert JS. 2014. Applications of sensory feedback in motorized upper extremity prosthesis: a review. Expert Rev Med Devices. 11(5):499–511.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stanchieri GDP, Saleh M, Sciulli M, De Marcellis A, Ibrahim A, Valle M, Faccio M, Palange E. 2019. FPGA-based tactile sensory feedback system with optical fiber data communication link for prosthetic applications. In: Valle M editor. 2019 26th IEEE International Conference on Electronics, Circuits and Systems (ICECS), Genova, Italy, pp 374–377.
   Google Scholar
• Stephens-Fripp B, Alici G, Mutlu R. 2018. A review of non-invasive sensory feedback methods for transradial prosthetic hands. IEEE Access. 6:6878–6899.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Svensson P, Wijk U, Björkman A, Antfolk C. 2017. A review of invasive and non-invasive sensory feedback in upper limb prostheses. Expert Rev Med Devices. 14(6):439–447.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trimberger SM editor. 1994. Field-programmable gate array technology. New York: Springer..
   Google Scholar
• Van der M, Olivier A, Schijven MP. 2009. The value of haptic feedback in conventional and robot-assisted minimal invasive surgery and virtual reality training: a current review. Surg Endosc. 23(6):1180–1190.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Verrillo RT. 1966. Vibrotactile thresholds for hairy skin. J Exp Psychol. 72(1):47–50.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Verrillo RT, Gescheider GA. 1975. Enhancement and summation in the perception of two successive vibrotactile stimuli. Percep Psychophys. 18(2):128–136.
   Google Scholar
• Witteveen HJ, Luft F, Rietman JS, Veltink PH. 2014. Stiffness feedback for myoelectric forearm prostheses using vibrotactile stimulation. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 22(1):53–61.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wobbrock JO, Findlater L, Gergle D, Higgins JJ. 2011. The aligned rank transform for non- parametric factorial analyses using only anova procedures. In: Tan D editor. CHI '11: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada, pp 143–146.
   Google Scholar
• Xu B, Li W, He X, Wei Z, Zhang D, Wu C, Song A. 2020. Motor imagery based continuous teleoperation robot control with tactile feedback. Electronics. 9:174–116.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yıldız MZ, Güçlü B. 2013. Relationship between vibrotactile detection threshold in the Pacinian channel and complex mechanical modulus of the human glabrous skin. Somatosens Motor Res. 30(1):37–47.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yıldız MZ, Toker İ, Özkan FB, Güçlü B. 2015. Effects of passive and active movement on vibrotactile detection thresholds of the Pacinian channel and forward masking. Somatosens Mot Res. 32(4):262–272.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar