Demo Data from EDBT 2026 / reviewers in the wild / expert
Rajiv Ravuri
dblp:139/4727
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
0since 2021 · last 1999
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Applied, interdisciplinary, general and emerging computing · 1
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
1 paper |
Robot manipulation · 100% |
Topics — the 3 heaviest of 3, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Robotics › Robot manipulation › tactile sensing › contact state recognition
contact classification |
0.0 | 1 | 1999 | Generalized recognition of single-ended contact formations · IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom. 1999 |
Robotics › Robot manipulation › tactile sensing › contact sensing
contact formation recognition |
0.0 | 1 | 1999 | Generalized recognition of single-ended contact formations · IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom. 1999 |
Robotics › Robot manipulation › force sensing
force/torque sensing |
0.0 | 1 | 1999 | Generalized recognition of single-ended contact formations · IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom. 1999 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
force/torque measurement · 0.0classifier training · 0.0
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1999 | Generalized recognition of single-ended contact formationsabstractContact formations have proven useful for programming robots by demonstration for operations involving contact. These techniques require real time recognition of contact formations. Single ended contact formation (SECF) classifiers using only the force/torque measured at the wrist of the robot have been shown to be quite effective for this purpose. To function properly, however, previous SECF classifiers have required a sizable training set and a constant pose between the force/torque sensor and the manipulated object. Thus, if an object is re-grasped and the pose changes, one expects to have to repeat the creation of the training set. We discuss the impact of sensor-object pose changes have on two successful classifiers. Experimental data shows that they perform poorly when sensor-object pose changes. We discuss a method to regain the performance of both classifiers while minimizing the retraining necessary. Louis J. Everett, Rajiv Ravuri, Richard A. Volz, Marjorie Skubic |
IEEE Trans. Robotics Autom. | 2 |