Demo Data from VLDB 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Michael Strohmayr
dblp:98/4674
· DBLP profile ↗
3ranked-venue papers
2as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 3 · 2 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 3 · 2 first-author
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
2 papers |
Robot manipulation · 100% | |
| Human-computer interaction and pervasive computing
1 paper |
Human-robot interaction · 100% |
Topics — the 5 heaviest of 6, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Robotics › Robot manipulation › tactile sensing › tactile skin
artificial skin |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | The DLR artificial skin step I: Uniting sensitivity and collision tolerance · ICRA 2013 |
Robotics › Robot manipulation
tactile sensing |
0.2 | 1 | 2013 | The DLR artificial skin step I: Uniting sensitivity and collision tolerance · ICRA 2013 |
Human-robot interaction
physical human-robot interaction |
0.1 | 1 | 2008 | Injury evaluation of human-robot impacts · ICRA 2008 |
Human-robot interaction
robot safety |
0.1 | 1 | 2008 | Injury evaluation of human-robot impacts · ICRA 2008 |
Robotics › Robot manipulation
robot design |
0.0 | 1 | 2008 | Injury evaluation of human-robot impacts · ICRA 2008 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
blunt impact tests · 0.2
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2013 | The DLR artificial skin step I: Uniting sensitivity and collision toleranceabstractThe integration of artificial skin into robotic systems has long been foreseen. For the last decades the introduction was always just a couple of years away. One of the possible reasons for the slow progress is the focus of the research efforts on high sensitivity and spatial resolution. The resulting tactile sensor prototypes are presented as laboratory prototypes with no or little chance to be successfully integrated into a robotic system. In order to enable the operation of an artificial skin on a robotic system in real-world applications the conflict of goals between high sensitivity and an overload-proof, collision tolerant, design needs to be solved. Within this paper we present a stretchable tactile surface sensor as a major functional component of an artificial skin setup that is able to unite the required sensitivity with the ability to withstand collisions. The results of first experiments regarding sensitivity and the ability of the DLR Artificial Skin setup to withstand high impact forces are presented. Michael Strohmayr, Heinz Wörn, Gerd Hirzinger |
ICRA | 1 |
| 2010 | The DLR touch sensor I: A flexible tactile sensor for robotic hands based on a crossed-wire approachabstractAbstract—One of the main challenges in service robotics is to equip dexterous robotic hands with sensitive tactile sensors in order to cope with the inherent problems posed by unknown and unstructured environments. As the increasing mechatronic integration of complex robotic hands leaves little additional space for proprioceptive sensors, exteroceptive tactile sensors become more and more important. We present a novel tactile sensor design, based on piezo-resistive soft material and a crossed-wire approach. We present the development of a first prototype and its evaluation in various classification tasks, showing promising results. I. Michael Strohmayr, Hannes P. Saal, Abhijit Potdar, Patrick van der Smagt |
IROS | 1 |
| 2008 | Injury evaluation of human-robot impactsabstractCurrently, large efforts are undertaken to bring robotic applications to domestic environments. Especially physical human-robot cooperation is a major concern and various design and control methodologies were developed on the way to achieve this task. In particular, this necessitates the evaluation of injury risks a human is exposed to in case he is hit by a robot. In this video several blunt impact tests are shown, leading to an assessment of which factors dominate injury severity. We will illustrate the effect robot speed, robot mass, and constraints in the environment have on safety in human- robot impacts. It will be shown that the intuition of high impact loads being transmitted by heavy robots is wrong. Furthermore, the conclusion is induced that free impacts are by far less dangerous than being crushed. Sami Haddadin, Alin Albu-Schäffer, Michael Strohmayr, Mirko Frommberger, Gerd Hirzinger |
ICRA | 3 |