Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

🚨 #UIST2024 Paper: TorqueCapsules 💊 We introduce a novel prototyping toolkit that can exert force, jump, or flip with encapsulated flywheel actuators. The device makes flywheel actuators easy/accessible to control and customize. The University of Chicago AxLab - Actuated Experience Lab Willa Yunqi Yang 🧵→

13,947 views • 1 year ago •via X (Twitter)

7 Comments

Ken Nakagaki's profile picture
Ken Nakagaki1 year ago

The device is highly customizable and reconfigurable with swappable lids/flywheels. Its self-contained design makes it easy to attach or embed into existing objects. Our accompanying control GUI makes it easy to control and design the actuation of the device.

Ken Nakagaki's profile picture
Ken Nakagaki1 year ago

While flywheel actuators have diverse and unique capabilities being used across haptics/robotics, it has been difficult to prototype and employ them. TorqueCapsules is designed to tackle this challenge by making people easily use flywheels' unique and diverse capabilities.

Ken Nakagaki's profile picture
Ken Nakagaki1 year ago

As such, TorqueCapsules can be employed for diverse applications: - actuating everyday objects 📱 - making your plush toys jump and flip 🧸 - or building custom haptic controllers 🎮

Ken Nakagaki's profile picture
Ken Nakagaki1 year ago

Title: TorqueCapsules: Fully-Encapsulated Flywheel Actuation Modules for Designing and Prototyping Movement-Based and Kinesthetic Interaction Authors: Willa Yunqi Yang @willayangy, Yifan Zou @yifan_zou_bot, Jingle Hung, Raouf Abujaber, Ken Nakagaki Paper:

Ken Nakagaki's profile picture
Ken Nakagaki1 year ago

Project Web: Full Video:

Ken Nakagaki's profile picture
Ken Nakagaki1 year ago

This was led by Willa @willayangy, one of AxLab's first PhDs. She aspires to enrich everyday environments with actuation - many more works to come ;) A big shout-out to her co-authors, especially Yifan @yifan_zou_bot, who is applying for grad school/PhD! Hire her for PhD - she is a fantastic researcher/artist/engineer!

tomoznow's profile picture
tomoznow1 year ago

@UChicago @AxLab_UChicago @willayangy Brilliant. Hope it comes to market. I'd like an easy to config actuator to use with webhooks. So, "press button in my web app" > "moves/rotates physical thing". And integration with home automation. PIR sensor > rules engine > actuator (ring physical bell/other cool stuff.)

Related Videos

The basic idea behind "UFO physics" is very simple. We can get a strong "upward" force from a fast-spinning magnet (or magnetic flywheel), because it "pushes against space" like a spinning gyroscope. Very easy, if we apply a rotating magnetic field (3 or 5-phase) to that magnet! The problem is that such an "upward" force is accompanied by an equal and opposite "downward" force by Newton's 3rd Law. So we see an increase of gravitational potential, but no loss of total weight ("up" plus "down"), unless that spinning magnet goes into "free fall". How to solve this great problem? The E.T. crop artists have suggested (many times) that we should try to change that "downward" force into another kind of force, which does NOT follow Newton's 3rd Law: namely the Lorentz force of electromagnetism. As shown in a video below, added DC current makes a disc magnet spin rapidly in one direction (by the Lorentz force), while other thin wires which supply that DC current spin in an opposite direction. We can see right away, that the mass of that disc magnet is perhaps 100 times more than the mass of many thin wires which surround it below. Yet they spin in opposite directions at approximately the same speeds! This shows that spin angular momentum (m x v x r) is NOT conserved, due to a peculiar sideways action of the Lorentz force. Does everyone understand so far? In summary, if we can change the "downward" force, for an upward spinning-magnet, into a Lorentz force, then we should have NO real "downward" force, but only a force that goes "up"! So that will be my next experiment. I have had to order some specialized parts to make the trial apparatus correctly, but will try to do it in October, after all needed parts arrive. "The simple is great" (Lao Tzu) 🛸

Red Collie (Dr. Horace Drew) scientist/inventor

29,769 views • 9 months ago

DisCo: Disentangled Control for Referring Human Dance Generation in Real World paper page: Generative AI has made significant strides in computer vision, particularly in image/video synthesis conditioned on text descriptions. Despite the advancements, it remains challenging especially in the generation of human-centric content such as dance synthesis. Existing dance synthesis methods struggle with the gap between synthesized content and real-world dance scenarios. In this paper, we define a new problem setting: Referring Human Dance Generation, which focuses on real-world dance scenarios with three important properties: (i) Faithfulness: the synthesis should retain the appearance of both human subject foreground and background from the reference image, and precisely follow the target pose; (ii) Generalizability: the model should generalize to unseen human subjects, backgrounds, and poses; (iii) Compositionality: it should allow for composition of seen/unseen subjects, backgrounds, and poses from different sources. To address these challenges, we introduce a novel approach, DISCO, which includes a novel model architecture with disentangled control to improve the faithfulness and compositionality of dance synthesis, and an effective human attribute pre-training for better generalizability to unseen humans. Extensive qualitative and quantitative results demonstrate that DISCO can generate high-quality human dance images and videos with diverse appearances and flexible motions.

AK

161,453 views • 3 years ago

*New Paper on AI & Democracy* Imagine two approaches to democracy. The one we have today, where citizens choose a professional politician to represent them and others. Or an augmented form of democracy, where each citizen controls a personalized AI that helps them participate in thousands of nuanced decisions. This second approach is the idea of Augmented Democracy I introduced six years ago at TED. In our latest paper we explore a simplified version of Augmented Democracy by combining off-the-shelf LLMs, such as ChatGPT, with data collected using a collaborative government program builder. This was an online game where people build a personalized government program using proposals extracted from the programs of the candidates of the 2022 presidential election in Brazil. So how accurate are these augmented forms of democracy? Imagine a user who gave us 40 answers. We can use the first 20 to fine-tune a model that we can test using the 20 answers the model didn’t see. We can then compare the accuracy of these predictions with the ones obtained by a “bundle” rule, which assumes that users that self-reported to be from the left or right always chose the proposals from the candidate that shares their political identity. This showed us that LLMs were more accurate at predicting policy preferences than the bundle rule, meaning that the preferences captured in the participation data were more nuanced than a left-right axis, and that the LLMs can capture some of that nuance. Also, the LLMs can choose among policies coming from the same candidate, which is something that we cannot do using a bundle rule. But can these LLMs help us complete the aggregate preferences of the population? Direct or unbundled forms of participation can result in incomplete data when people answer only a fraction of all questions. In our paper, we simulate this incompleteness by sampling the full dataset. We ask how close we can get to the full dataset by using a random sample, or a random sample augmented by predictions made by these LLMs. Overall, we find that LLM-augmented data gets much closer to the full dataset than a pure random sample. These results do not mean that augmented democracy technology is ready, but they means we are in a much better place to continue exploring this idea than six years ago. This paper was a collaborative effort with Jairo Gudino, PhD student at CCL at the University of Toulouse Capitole and Umberto Grandi from IRIT also at the University of Toulouse Capitole. We hope you find these results insightful!

César A. Hidalgo

26,915 views • 1 year ago

Everything Elon said about Optimus at the All-In Summit today: • We’re finalizing the design of Optimus v3. That release is going to be a very remarkable robot. It will have manual dexterity comparable to a human, meaning a very complex hand, an AI mind that can navigate and comprehend reality, and will be made in very high volume. • Other robotics companies are missing those three very hard things. • I spend more mental cycles on Optimus than any other single thing. Solving real-world AI, all of the electrical-mechanical issues, the supply chain, and production challenges. • There is no supply chain for humanoid robots, so it has to be created from scratch, which requires a lot of vertical integration. None of the actuators in Optimus are available from an existing supply chain. • I think if successful, Optimus would be the biggest product ever. • The marginal cost of production, once we hit a million units per year, will probably be around $20,000. It depends on how much we spend on the AI chip in the robot, and we’ll need to achieve a lot of efficiencies in the actuators—26 actuators per arm (26 motors, gearboxes, and power electronics). The AI chip might cost $5,000 or $6,000, maybe more. At 1 million units a year, production cost will be $20,000, maybe $25,000. Price will be a function of demand. • Human hands have evolved to be incredibly sophisticated machines. Hands are a very first instrument. You can swing a baseball bat, thread a needle, play a piano or violin, and assemble a car. Hands are incredibly versatile instruments. Most of the muscles of the hands are actually in the forearm, and the hand is almost like a puppet. Human tendon evolution is incredibly good. The human hand has 27 or 28 degrees of freedom, depending on how you count it; it’s amazing. • In order to create a robot that can be a generalized humanoid, you must solve the “hands problem.” • Even though there are 10,000 to 20,000 electric motors out there, we couldn’t buy the actuators for any amount of money. We had to design every electric motor, gearbox, and controlling electronics from scratch, from first principles of physics. • Optimus is harder than developing any previous Tesla product, but not harder than Starship. • Right now, we’re struggling with the final design of the hardware, primarily the hand. The hands and forearm are the majority of the engineering difficulty of the entire robot. • If you want to do all the things that a human can do, it turns out you need a humanoid robot. If you want to do a subset, that’s much easier. Humans evolved to the shape and capability that we have for a good reason. There is value to having four fingers and a thumb; even the pinky is quite useful. Toes are much more of a question mark. • The AI5 inference chip will be 40 times better than AI4 by some measures. We know the limiting factors of the chip because the AI software and hardware teams work so closely. Effectively, the Tesla AI hardware and software teams are co-designing the chip. • The Softmax function on AI4 takes 40 steps in emulation mode, which will take only a few steps in AI5 natively. AI5 will easily handle mixed precision. • In terms of nominal raw compute, the AI5 inference chip has 8 times more compute, 9 times more memory, and 5 times more memory bandwidth compared to AI4. Because we’re addressing some core limitations and optimizations at the silicon level, we’re able to realize 40x improvements.

The Humanoid Hub

238,630 views • 10 months ago