Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 63 references

Design of a bioinspired robophysical antenna for insect-scale tactile perception and navigation

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read CITRAS: a 491 mg cockroach-inspired tactile antenna that measures hinge angles to below a degree and reads gaps, distances, and textures by touch.

desk verdict A genuinely compact, SWaP-friendly multi-hinge capacitive antenna with real engineering merit, but the headline accuracy numbers are probably in-sample and the application demos need more trials before the claims fully land. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.23719 v1 pith:JA24MYXI submitted 2025-07-31 cs.RO

Parker McDonnell , Lingsheng Meng , Hari Krishna Hariprasad , Alexander Hedrick , Eduardo Miscles , Samuel Gilinsky , Jean-Michel Mongeau , Kaushik Jayaram This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.RO
keywords tactilesensorcapacitivesensingrobophysicalantennainsect-scaleroboticsbioinspiredlaminatemanufacturingcockroachnavigation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper introduces CITRAS, a cockroach-inspired robotic antenna for insect-scale robots that cannot carry cameras or lidar. It aims to prove that a sub-gram, low-power laminate structure with eight embedded capacitive angle sensors can give tiny robots close-range tactile perception. It reports hinge-angle measurement with maximum errors of 0.79 degrees under quasistatic bending and 3.58 degrees under dynamic bending, and it demonstrates predicting base-to-tip distance with 7.75 percent error, estimating environmental gap widths with 6.73 percent error, and distinguishing smooth from rough surfaces. If correct, insect-scale robots would gain a tactile sense that currently they lack, enabling navigation in dark, confined, cluttered spaces by touch alone.

What carries the argument

The central object is the CITRAS antenna: eight compliant flexural hinges, each with an embedded capacitive angle sensor formed by a fixed electrode and a sliding electrode acting as a parallel-plate capacitor. As a hinge bends, the electrode overlap changes, producing femtofarad-level capacitance changes that a capacitance-to-digital converter reads at roughly 80 Hz per sensor. Third-order polynomial calibrations convert capacitance to hinge angle, and forward kinematics turn the eight measured angles into shape and distance estimates. The hinge width tapers linearly from 8.0 mm at the base to 3.62 mm at the tip, giving a stiffness gradient that lets the antenna passively conform to surfaces and concentrates sensitivity at the distal segments.

What would settle it

Fabricate a second antenna using the same process, apply the first antenna's calibration polynomials to its raw capacitance data, and release its tip by 56 degrees while tracking ground-truth hinge angles; if the maximum hinge-angle error exceeds the claimed 3.58 degrees, the batch-transfer assumption fails. A simpler check is to re-fit the capacitance-angle curve on the same antenna after remounting it, to see whether the calibration is stable to handling and mounting.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper claims that a bioinspired, multi-segmented compliant antenna can serve as a distributed tactile sensor that meets the size, weight, and power constraints of insect-scale robots. The discovery is that eight capacitive mechanosensors placed at flexural hinges, each calibrated with an individual third-order polynomial, can reconstruct antenna shape with high accuracy and support three real navigation-relevant tasks: body-to-wall distance estimation, environmental gap width estimation, and surface texture discrimination through differential sensor response.

Load-bearing premise

The whole sensing pipeline rests on per-hinge polynomial calibrations fit under slow benchtop deflections remaining valid for fast, off-calibration contacts, different contact points, and other copies of the antenna, since the theoretical capacitance model is about 3.7 times off from the measured sensitivity and cannot predict behavior on its own.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Insect-scale robots gain a close-range tactile sense without vision, enabling wall-following, obstacle avoidance, and gap assessment in dark or confined spaces.
  • The spatiotemporal 'tactile image' representation, plotting hinge angle against hinge position and time, provides a signal structure suitable for automated classification of objects, contact locations, and textures.
  • The calibrated capacitance-to-angle relationship turns the antenna into a shape-reconstruction probe, so distances and gap widths can be derived through forward kinematics rather than by adding extra range sensors.
  • At 491 mg and 32 mW, the sensor payload is light and low-power enough to fit on existing insect-scale legged robots designed for locomotion in laterally confined spaces.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The observed sensitivity, about 26.5 fF per degree, is 3.7 times larger than the paper's theoretical prediction of 7.14 fF per degree, which means the parallel-plate model does not explain the device; the empirical fits carry the entire argument, so a mechanistic model would need to account for parasitic capacitance and out-of-plane electrode motion to be predictive.
  • The antenna's damping ratio, roughly 0.035 compared with about 0.3 in the biological cockroach antenna, implies slow settling after rapid deflection, so closed-loop tactile navigation may be limited in speed until passive or active damping is added.
  • Batch-to-batch calibration transfer is untested: the reported accuracy holds for the demonstrated prototype, and a study using one antenna's calibration polynomials on a second fabricated unit would establish whether the performance generalizes beyond the bench example.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents CITRAS, a 491 mg, 32 mW laminate antenna with eight capacitive hinge-angle sensors fabricated from a cockroach-inspired tapered compliant structure. The authors characterize quasistatic and dynamic angle sensing, reporting average/maximum errors of 0.056/0.795 deg in quasistatic bending and 0.10/3.58 deg in dynamic bending, and demonstrate three application tasks: body-to-wall distance estimation (maximum error 7.75%), environmental gap-width estimation (4.66-6.73% error), and surface texture discrimination via differential sensor response. The central claim is that a sub-gram, low-power tactile antenna can provide accurate distributed shape sensing suitable for insect-scale robot navigation.

Significance. If the reported accuracy is robust, the contribution is significant: CITRAS would be one of the few insect-scale tactile sensors with distributed capacitive angle sensing, a complete fabrication pipeline, and concrete application demonstrations, with favorable size, weight, power, and sampling rate compared with prior whisker- and antenna-based sensors. The manuscript is also commendable for making code available and for honestly discussing the low damping and saturation limitations. However, the central numerical claims currently rest on validation procedures that are not fully described; the distinction between in-sample fits and out-of-sample predictions is not established, and the application tasks lack repeated-trial statistics and batch-to-batch transfer evidence.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 3.2, Figure 5] The paper does not state whether the hinge-angle data used to evaluate the third-order polynomial predictions were held out from the data used to fit those polynomials. As written, the reported average error of 0.056 +/- 0.079 deg and maximum error of 0.795 deg could be in-sample training residuals, which do not measure prediction accuracy for new contacts, new trajectories, or new manufactured samples. Please state explicitly whether the evaluation trials are distinct from the fitting trials; if they are not, provide held-out trials or k-fold cross-validation results.
  2. [Sections 3.3, 3.4, Figure 6] The abstract's dynamic maximum error of 3.58 deg should be reconciled with the saturation behavior described in Section 3.4. The dynamic test displaces the tip by about 56 deg, and Section 3.4 shows that hinges H1-H3 saturate beyond roughly +/-10 deg; if the dynamic evaluation includes the saturated interval, the reported maximum error is dominated by a known sensor limitation rather than by tracking performance in the operational range. Please report dynamic errors separately for the unsaturated and saturated regimes and specify which value is quoted in the abstract.
  3. [Sections 4.1, 4.2] The application demonstrations (BTWD maximum 7.75% error; gap-width errors 4.66-6.73%) are reported without repeated trials, confidence intervals, or batch-to-batch validation. Because all downstream estimates inherit the per-hinge empirical calibrations, the reader cannot assess whether these errors are typical or reflect favorable single trials. Please provide the number of trials, per-trial errors, and, if possible, results from a second antenna sample.
  4. [Sections 2.1.3, 3.2] The measured sensitivity (26.5 fF/deg) is 3.7 times the theoretical prediction (7.14 fF/deg) from Eq. (4), and the theoretical model is nevertheless used to argue resolution (0.04 deg/count). Because the mechanistic model is not validated, the linear extrapolation to resolution and the transfer of calibrations across hinges should be treated with caution, and the paper should state this limitation explicitly rather than attributing the discrepancy only to manufacturing imperfections.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3] The introductory paragraph ends with 'we examine the angular sensing limitations ... in Section .' with the section number missing; please insert 'Section 3.4'.
  2. [Sections 3.2, 3.3] The abstract reports maximum errors of '0.79 degree (quasistatic) and 3.58 degree (dynamic)', but the quasistatic maximum is 0.795 deg and the dynamic maximum is not explicitly reported in Section 3.3; please make the provenance of the 3.58 deg value explicit in the main text.
  3. [Figure 7B] The markers 'A' and 'B' for the estimated linear limits are not defined in the text or caption; please define them in the caption or in a sentence in Section 3.4.
  4. [Section 2.1.3] There are typographical errors, including 'vaccuum' for 'vacuum'; a careful proofread is recommended.
  5. [Section 3.3] The phrase 'standard system identification methods' gives no detail; please specify the fitting procedure used to obtain the natural frequency and damping ratio.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: calibrated angle sensing is used to predict downstream distances and gaps, with no fitting to target outputs; self-citations are contextual.

full rationale

No load-bearing step reduces to its inputs by construction. The sensor's capacitance-to-angle transfer functions are empirical per-hinge polynomial calibrations, but the paper's headline outputs (body-to-wall distance, gap width, texture discrimination) are not fit to those outputs; they are obtained by applying the calibrated angles through forward kinematics and fixed thresholds. The quasistatic and dynamic angle errors report how well the calibrated transfer functions track independently measured marker-based ground truth. The theoretical parallel-plate model (Eq. 4) predicts a different sensitivity (7.14 vs 26.5 fF/deg), but none of the application claims rely on that model, so the mismatch is an explanatory gap rather than circularity. Citations to prior cockroach-antenna work, including work by overlapping authors, are used to motivate the bioinspired stiffness design, but the sensor's measured performance is self-contained and does not depend on those cited results. The manuscript's lack of explicit held-out and cross-batch validation raises external-validity and generalizability concerns, but it does not exhibit the specific reduction required for a circularity finding.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central performance claims rest on empirical per-hinge calibration fits; the theoretical model is not predictive. Design parameters (hinge geometry) were hand-optimized, and a detection threshold is user-set. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • Per-hinge calibration polynomial coefficients (third-order, 8 hinges) = not reported in text
    Each mechanosensor is individually calibrated with a third-order polynomial fit to capacitance vs angle data (Section 3.2); the measured sensitivity (26.5 fF/deg) is used for angle prediction instead of the theoretical 7.14 fF/deg.
  • Capacitance threshold for gap-edge detection = 3.5 fF
    Chosen as 6 sigma above noise floor (Section 4.2); affects gap width estimates.
  • Hinge geometry parameters (width taper 8.0 to 3.62 mm, thickness 25 um, length 150 um) = stated
    Described as 'experimentally optimized' (Sections 2.1.1 and 2.2.3); these choices set the mechanical compliance profile but are not claimed to be optimal.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Parallel-plate capacitor model with linear overlap-angle relation (Eq. 4)
    Used to derive C(theta) in Section 2.1.3, but measured sensitivity is 3.7x higher, suggesting the model is not quantitatively accurate.
  • domain assumption Planar (2-DOF) bending and independent hinge motion
    The fixture constrains motion to a plane (Section 3.1), and the kinematic chain assumes each hinge angle is recoverable from its local sensor without crosstalk; not explicitly validated.
  • domain assumption Video tracking (DLTdv) provides accurate ground-truth hinge angles
    Used to label calibration and test data (Section 3.1); no reported tracking uncertainty.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Design of a bioinspired robophysical antenna for insect-scale tactile perception and navigation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JA24MYXI

@misc{pith2026250723719,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Design of a bioinspired robophysical antenna for insect-scale tactile perception and navigation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JA24MYXI}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.23719}
}
read the original abstract

The American cockroach (Periplaneta americana) uses its soft antennae to guide decision making by extracting rich tactile information from tens of thousands of distributed mechanosensors. Although tactile sensors enable robust, autonomous perception and navigation in natural systems, replicating these capabilities in insect-scale robots remains challenging due to stringent size, weight, and power constraints that limit existing sensor technologies. To overcome these limitations, we introduce CITRAS (Cockroach Inspired Tactile Robotic Antenna Sensor), a bioinspired, multi-segmented, compliant laminate sensor with embedded capacitive angle sensors. CITRAS is compact (73.7x15.6x2.1 mm), lightweight (491 mg), and low-power (32 mW), enabling seamless integration with miniature robotic platforms. The segmented compliant structure passively bends in response to environmental stimuli, achieving accurate hinge angle measurements with maximum errors of just 0.79 degree (quasistatic bending) and 3.58 degree (dynamic bending). Experimental evaluations demonstrate CITRAS' multifunctional tactile perception capabilities: predicting base-to-tip distances with 7.75 % error, estimating environmental gap widths with 6.73 % error, and distinguishing surface textures through differential sensor response. The future integration of this bioinspired tactile antenna in insect-scale robots addresses critical sensing gaps, promising enhanced autonomous exploration, obstacle avoidance, and environmental mapping in complex, confined environments.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.23719 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Robotic antenna prototype overview and concept of operation (A) Final robotic antenna pro￾totype assembly and scale reference. (B) Example of a robotic antenna integrated on mm-scale robot for future tactile exploration applications. those of their natural counterparts. For instance, drawing inspiration from the compliant exoskeletons of arthropods, recent miniature robots are now capa￾ble of adaptive morphological … view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Overview of sensor theory of operation, material stackup and manufacturing methods. (A) Hinge and sensing layer flexure mechanics and notation. (B) Simplified sensor concept of operation during positive and negative deflection. (C) Antenna material stackup of single hinge. (D) Manufacturing processes involved in antenna fabrication. (E) Render of complete antenna assembly with sensor breakout board. (F) Demonstratio… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Experimental setup overview (A) Eight channel capacitive to digital converter (CDC) PCB records sensor capacitance and transmits data over serial connection to host PC. (B) Schematic view of experimental setup configured to collect data for quasistatic and dynamic results. (C) View of antenna and tracking markers from speed camera perspective. DLTdv was used to extract marker X-Y location from video. (D) Detailed bl… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Quasistatic sensor characterization ex￾perimental setup and results. (A) Quasistatic ex￾perimental setup shown from antenna tracking cam￾era perspective. (B) Servo motor angle versus time profile during characterization experiment. (C) Ca￾pacitance change versus hinge …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Sensor response during dynamic bending (A) High speed optical image sequence depicting antenna motion during dynamic bending. (B) Antenna hinge numbering legend from base to tip. (C) Comparison of sensor based prediction and ground truth hinge angle (1 − 8). (D) Angula…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Sensor angle limit characterization during large bending. (A) Large antenna deflection at mo￾ment of release. (B) Sensor capacitive change versus angle response versus hinge angle curve. Estimated sensor linear limits indicated by A & B. (C) Sensor predicted vs. ground…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Prediction of body to wall distance (BTWD) with sensorized antenna (A) Schematic di￾agram of experimental setup with measurement defi￾nitions. (B) Comparison of actual and sensor based estimate of body to wall distance (top), and resulting percent error (bottom). For s…
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Sizing up the environment: measuring unknown gap dimensions (A) Diagram of gap detection experimental setup. Three gap widths were experimentally simulated, and later estimated by post processing the fixture angle and response of sensor one. (B) Gap width detection res…
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Antenna response to variable surface roughness. (A) Simplified diagram of test fixtures used for texture discrimination experiments. (B) Re￾sulting tactile images generated from raw sensor re￾sponse. Both smooth and rough surfaces generate analogously textured tactile…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Effective locomotion at multiple stride frequen- cies using proprioceptive feedback on a legged microrobot

    Neel Doshi, Kaushik Jayaram, Samantha Castel- lanos, Scott Kuindersma, and Robert J Wood. Effective locomotion at multiple stride frequen- cies using proprioceptive feedback on a legged microrobot. Bioinspiration & biomimetics , 14(5):056001, 2019. Publisher: IOP Publishing

    work page 2019

  2. [2]

    Farrell Helbling, and Robert J

    Kaushik Jayaram, Jennifer Shum, Samantha Castellanos, E. Farrell Helbling, and Robert J. Wood. Scaling down an insect-size microrobot, HAMR-VI into HAMR-Jr. In 2020 IEEE Inter- national Conference on Robotics and Automa- tion (ICRA) , pages 10305–10311, May 2020. ISSN: 2577-087X

    work page 2020

  3. [3]

    Buffalo byte: A highly mobile and au- tonomous millirobot platform

    Shashwat Singh, Reed Truax, and Ryan St Pierre. Buffalo byte: A highly mobile and au- tonomous millirobot platform. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , 2024

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    Picotaur: A 15 mg hexapedal robot with electrostatically driven, 3d-printed legs

    Sukjun Kim, Aaron M Johnson, and Sarah Berg- breiter. Picotaur: A 15 mg hexapedal robot with electrostatically driven, 3d-printed legs. Ad- vanced Intelligent Systems, 6(10):2400196, 2024

    work page 2024

  5. [5]

    Yim, Huimin Chen, Zicong Miao, Hanxiao Liu, Ying Liu, Yixin Liu, Dongkai Wang, Wenying Qiu, Zhichun Shao, Min Zhang, Xiaohao Wang, Junwen Zhong, and Liwei Lin

    Jiaming Liang, Yichuan Wu, Justin K. Yim, Huimin Chen, Zicong Miao, Hanxiao Liu, Ying Liu, Yixin Liu, Dongkai Wang, Wenying Qiu, Zhichun Shao, Min Zhang, Xiaohao Wang, Junwen Zhong, and Liwei Lin. Electrostatic footpads enable agile insect-scale soft robots with trajectory control. Science Robotics , 6(55):eabe7906, June 2021. Publisher: Ameri- can Associ...

    work page 2021

  6. [6]

    MilliMobile: An autonomous battery- free wireless microrobot

    Kyle Johnson, Zachary Englhardt, Vicente Ar- royos, Dennis Yin, Shwetak Patel, and Vikram REFERENCES 17 Iyer. MilliMobile: An autonomous battery- free wireless microrobot. In Proceedings of the 29th Annual International Conference on Mobile Computing and Networking , pages 1–16. ACM, 2023

    work page 2023

  7. [7]

    G. C. H. E. de Croon, J. J. G. Dupeyroux, S. B. Fuller, and J. A. R. Marshall. Insect-inspired AI for autonomous robots. Science Robotics , 7(67):eabl6334, June 2022. Publisher: American Association for the Advancement of Science

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Kaushik Jayaram and Robert J. Full. Cock- roaches traverse crevices, crawl rapidly in con- fined spaces, and inspire a soft, legged robot. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sci- ences, 113(8):E950–E957, February 2016. Pub- lisher: Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences

    work page 2016

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    Design of CLARI: A Miniature Modular Origami Pas- sive Shape-Morphing Robot

    Heiko Kabutz and Kaushik Jayaram. Design of CLARI: A Miniature Modular Origami Pas- sive Shape-Morphing Robot. Advanced Intelli- gent Systems , 5(12):2300181, 2023

    2023

  2. [10]

    McDonnell, and Kaushik Jayaram

    Heiko Kabutz, Alexander Hedrick, William P. McDonnell, and Kaushik Jayaram. mCLARI: A Shape-Morphing Insect-Scale Robot Capa- ble of Omnidirectional Terrain-Adaptive Loco- motion in Laterally Confined Spaces. In 2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelli- gent Robots an...

    2023

  3. [11]

    Drone-assisted collec- tion of environmental dna from tree branches for biodiversity monitoring

    Emanuele Aucone, Steffen Kirchgeorg, Al- ice Valentini, Lo ¨ ıc Pellissier, Kristy Deiner, and Stefano Mintchev. Drone-assisted collec- tion of environmental dna from tree branches for biodiversity monitoring. Science robotics , 8(74):eadd5762, 2023

    2023

  4. [12]

    de Rivaz, Benjamin Goldberg, Neel Doshi, Kaushik Jayaram, Jack Zhou, and Robert J

    S´ ebastien D. de Rivaz, Benjamin Goldberg, Neel Doshi, Kaushik Jayaram, Jack Zhou, and Robert J. Wood. Inverted and vertical climbing of a quadrupedal microrobot using electroadhe- sion. Science Robotics, 3(25):eaau3038, Decem- ber 2018. Publisher: American Association for th...

    2018

  5. [13]

    Pierre and Sarah Bergbreiter

    Ryan St. Pierre and Sarah Bergbreiter. Toward autonomy in sub-gram terrestrial robots.Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, 2(1):231–252, 2019

    2019

  6. [14]

    Roadmap for clinical translation of mobile microrobotics

    Ugur Bozuyuk, Paul Wrede, Erdost Yildiz, and Metin Sitti. Roadmap for clinical translation of mobile microrobotics. Advanced Materials , 36(23):2311462, 2024

    2024

  7. [15]

    Tactile and vision perception for intelligent humanoids

    Shuo Gao, Yanning Dai, and Arokia Nathan. Tactile and vision perception for intelligent humanoids. Advanced Intelligent Systems , 4(2):2100074, 2022

    2022

  8. [16]

    Learning robust perceptive locomotion for quadrupedal robots in the wild

    Takahiro Miki, Joonho Lee, Jemin Hwangbo, Lorenz Wellhausen, Vladlen Koltun, and Marco Hutter. Learning robust perceptive locomotion for quadrupedal robots in the wild. Science robotics, 7(62):eabk2822, 2022

    2022

  9. [17]

    Learning to jump from pixels

    Gabriel B Margolis, Tao Chen, Kartik Paigwar, Xiang Fu, Donghyun Kim, Sang bae Kim, and Pulkit Agrawal. Learning to jump from pixels. In Conference on Robot Learning , pages 1025–

  10. [18]

    A gyroscope-free visual-inertial flight control and wind sensing system for 10-mg robots

    Sawyer Fuller, Zhitao Yu, and Yash P Talwekar. A gyroscope-free visual-inertial flight control and wind sensing system for 10-mg robots. Sci- ence Robotics, 7(72):eabq8184, 2022

    2022

  11. [19]

    Perception and sensing for autonomous vehicles under adverse weather conditions: A survey

    Yuxiao Zhang, Alexander Carballo, Hanting Yang, and Kazuya Takeda. Perception and sensing for autonomous vehicles under adverse weather conditions: A survey. ISPRS Journal of Photogrammetry and Remote Sensing , 196:146– 177, 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    One small step for a robot, one giant leap for habitat monitor- ing: A structural survey of EU forest habi- tats with robotically-mounted mobile laser scan- ning (RMLS)

    Leopoldo de Simone, Emanuele Fanfarillo, Si- mona Maccherini, Tiberio Fiaschi, Giuseppe Alfonso, Franco Angelini, Manolo Garabini, and Claudia Angiolini. One small step for a robot, one giant leap for habitat monitor- ing: A structural survey of EU forest habi- tats with robot...

    2024

  13. [21]

    Quadrupedal locomotion on uneven ter- rain with sensorized feet

    Giorgio Valsecchi, Ruben Grandia, and Marco Hutter. Quadrupedal locomotion on uneven ter- rain with sensorized feet. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 5(2):1548–1555, 2020

    2020

  14. [22]

    Fuller, Alexander Sands, Andreas Haggerty, Michael Karpelson, and Robert J

    Sawyer B. Fuller, Alexander Sands, Andreas Haggerty, Michael Karpelson, and Robert J. Wood. Estimating attitude and wind veloc- ity using biomimetic sensors on a microrobotic bee. In 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation , pages 1374–1380,

    2013

  15. [23]

    Farrell Helbling, Sawyer B

    E. Farrell Helbling, Sawyer B. Fuller, and Robert J. Wood. Altitude estimation and control of an insect-scale robot with an onboard prox- imity sensor. In Antonio Bicchi and Wolfram Burgard, editors, Robotics Research: Volume 1 , pages 57–69. Springer International Publishing, 2018

    2018

  16. [24]

    Benjamin Goldberg, Raphael Zufferey, Neel Doshi, Elizabeth Farrell Helbling, Griffin Whit- tredge, Mirko Kovac, and Robert J. Wood. Power and control autonomy for high-speed loco- motion with an insect-scale legged robot. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , 3(2):987–993, 2018

    2018

  17. [25]

    A bio-hybrid odor-guided autonomous palm-sized air vehicle

    Melanie J Anderson, Joseph G Sullivan, Timo- thy K Horiuchi, Sawyer B Fuller, and Thomas L Daniel. A bio-hybrid odor-guided autonomous palm-sized air vehicle. Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, 16(2):026002, 2020

    2020

  18. [26]

    Con- comitant sensing and actuation for piezoelectric microrobots

    Kaushik Jayaram, Noah T Jafferis, Neel Doshi, Ben Goldberg, and Robert J Wood. Con- comitant sensing and actuation for piezoelectric microrobots. Smart Materials and Structures , 27(6):065028, 2018

    2018

  19. [27]

    Integrated proprioceptive piezoelectric actuators for minia- ture robots and devices

    Heiko Kabutz and Kaushik Jayaram. Integrated proprioceptive piezoelectric actuators for minia- ture robots and devices. Smart Materials and Structures, 34(3):035004, 2025. Publisher: IOP Publishing

    2025

  20. [28]

    Tinysense: A lighter weight and more power-efficient avion- ics system for flying insect-scale robots

    Zhitao Yu, Joshua Tran, Claire Li, Aaron Weber, Yash P Talwekar, and Sawyer Fuller. Tinysense: A lighter weight and more power-efficient avion- ics system for flying insect-scale robots. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.03416, 2025

    2025 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Active sensing capabilities of the rat whisker system

    Mitra J Hartmann. Active sensing capabilities of the rat whisker system. Autonomous Robots, 11:249–254, 2001

    2001

  22. [30]

    What can whiskers tell us about mammalian evolu- tion, behaviour, and ecology? Mammal Review, 52(1):148–163, 2022

    Robyn A Grant and Victor GA Goss. What can whiskers tell us about mammalian evolu- tion, behaviour, and ecology? Mammal Review, 52(1):148–163, 2022

    2022

  23. [31]

    Whiskers as hydrodynamic prey sensors in forag- ing seals

    Taiki Adachi, Yasuhiko Naito, Patrick W Robin- son, Daniel P Costa, Luis A H¨ uckst¨ adt, Rachel R Holser, Wataru Iwasaki, and Akinori Takahashi. Whiskers as hydrodynamic prey sensors in forag- ing seals. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(25):e2119502119, 2022

    2022

  24. [32]

    Dallmann, Kaushik Jayaram, Noah J

    Jean-Michel Mongeau, Alican Demir, Chris J. Dallmann, Kaushik Jayaram, Noah J. Cowan, and Robert J. Full. Mechanical processing via passive dynamic properties of the cock- roach antenna can facilitate control during rapid running. Journal of Experimental Biology , 217(18):3333...

    2014

  25. [33]

    Sponberg, John P

    Jean-Michel Mongeau, Simon N. Sponberg, John P. Miller, and Robert J. Full. Sensory pro- cessing within antenna enables rapid implemen- tation of feedback control for high-speed running maneuvers. Journal of Experimental Biology , page jeb.118604, January 2015

    2015

  26. [34]

    Teresa A Kent, Suhan Kim, Gabriel Kornilow- icz, Wenzhen Yuan, Mitra J. Z. Hartmann, and Sarah Bergbreiter. WhiskSight: A Reconfig- urable, Vision-Based, Optical Whisker Sensing Array for Simultaneous Contact, Airflow, and Inertia Stimulus Detection. IEEE Robotics and Automati...

    2021

  27. [35]

    Evans, Charles W

    Mathew H. Evans, Charles W. Fox, Nathan F. Lepora, Martin J. Pearson, J. Charles Sullivan, and Tony J. Prescott. The effect of whisker REFERENCES 19 movement on radial distance estimation: a case study in comparative robotics. Frontiers in Neu- rorobotics, 6:12, January 2013

    2013

  28. [36]

    Self-powered bionic antenna based on triboelectric nanogenerator for micro-robotic tactile sensing

    Dekuan Zhu, Jiangfeng Lu, Mingjie Zheng, Dongkai Wang, Jianyu Wang, Yixin Liu, Xiao- hao Wang, and Min Zhang. Self-powered bionic antenna based on triboelectric nanogenerator for micro-robotic tactile sensing. Nano Energy, 114:108644, September 2023

    2023

  29. [37]

    Solomon and Mitra J

    Joseph H. Solomon and Mitra J. Hartmann. Robotic whiskers used to sense features. Na- ture, 443(7111):525–525, October 2006. Num- ber: 7111 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2006

  30. [38]

    Mulvey and Thrishantha Nanayakkara

    Barry W. Mulvey and Thrishantha Nanayakkara. HA VEN: Haptic And Visual Environment Navigation by a Shape-Changing Mobile Robot with Multimodal Perception. Scientific Reports, 14(1):27018, November 2024. Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2024

  31. [39]

    A tunable physical model of arthropod antennae

    Alican Demir, Edward W Samson, and Noah J Cowan. A tunable physical model of arthropod antennae. In 2010 IEEE International Confer- ence on Robotics and Automation , pages 3793– 3798, Anchorage, AK, May 2010. IEEE

    2010

  32. [40]

    A tunable, multiseg- mented robotic antenna for identifying and test- ing biomechanical design principles

    A Demir, EG Samson, JM Mongeau, K Jayaram, RJ Full, and NJ Cowan. A tunable, multiseg- mented robotic antenna for identifying and test- ing biomechanical design principles. In INTE- GRATIVE AND COMPARATIVE BIOLOGY , volume 51, pages E182–E182. OXFORD UNIV PRESS INC JOURNALS DE...

    2001

  33. [41]

    Lamperski, O.Y

    A.G. Lamperski, O.Y. Loh, B.L. Kutscher, and N.J. Cowan. Dynamical Wall Following for a Wheeled Robot Using a Passive Tactile Sensor. In Proceedings of the 2005 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation , pages 3838–3843, April 2005. ISSN: 1050-4729

    2005

  34. [42]

    Fereshteh Shahmiri and Paul H. Dietz. ShArc: A Geometric Technique for Multi-Bend/Shape Sensing. In Proceedings of the 2020 CHI Confer- ence on Human Factors in Computing Systems , pages 1–12, Honolulu HI USA, April 2020. ACM

    2020

  35. [43]

    Mechan- ical and morphological features of the cockroach antenna confer flexibility, reveal a kinematic chain system and predict strain information for proprioception

    Lingsheng Meng, Parker McDonnell, Kaushik Jayaram, and Jean-Michel Mongeau. Mechan- ical and morphological features of the cockroach antenna confer flexibility, reveal a kinematic chain system and predict strain information for proprioception. bioRxiv, pages 2025–04, 2025

    2025

  36. [44]

    R. J. Wood, S. Avadhanula, R. Sahai, E. Steltz, and R. S. Fearing. Microrobot Design Using Fiber Reinforced Composites. Journal of Me- chanical Design, 130(5), March 2008

    2008

  37. [45]

    Pop-up book MEMS

    J P Whitney, P S Sreetharan, K Y Ma, and R J Wood. Pop-up book MEMS. Jour- nal of Micromechanics and Microengineering , 21(11):115021, 2011

    2011

  38. [46]

    Lo, Yunran Huang, Junhong Chen, James Calo, Wei Chen, and Benny Lo

    Zeyu Wang, Frank P.-W. Lo, Yunran Huang, Junhong Chen, James Calo, Wei Chen, and Benny Lo. Tactile perception: a biomimetic whisker-based method for clinical gastrointesti- nal diseases screening. npj Robotics, 1(1):1–15, October 2023. Number: 1 Publisher: Nature Publishing Group

    2023

  39. [47]

    A robust and omnidirectional-sensitive electronic antenna for tactile-induced perception

    Hao Ren, Liu Yang, Hong-yuan Chang, Tieshan Zhang, Gen Li, Xiong Yang, Yifeng Tang, Wan- feng Shang, and Yajing Shen. A robust and omnidirectional-sensitive electronic antenna for tactile-induced perception. Nature Communica- tions, 16(1):3135, 2025. Publisher: Nature Pub- lis...

    2025

  40. [48]

    Bioinspired, omnidirectional, and hyper- sensitive flexible strain sensors

    Linpeng Liu, Shichao Niu, Junqiu Zhang, Zhengzhi Mu, Jing Li, Bo Li, Xiancun Meng, Changchao Zhang, Yueqiao Wang, Tao Hou, Zhiwu Han, Shu Yang, and Luquan Ren. Bioinspired, omnidirectional, and hyper- sensitive flexible strain sensors. Advanced Materials, 34(17):2200823, 2022....

    2022 doi

  41. [49]

    An all- optical multidirectional mechano-sensor inspired by biologically mechano-sensitive hair sensilla

    Yuxiang Li, Zhihe Guo, Xuyang Zhao, Sheng Liu, Zhenmin Chen, Wen-Fei Dong, Shixiang REFERENCES 20 Wang, Yun-Lu Sun, and Xiang Wu. An all- optical multidirectional mechano-sensor inspired by biologically mechano-sensitive hair sensilla. Nature Communications, 15(1):2906, 2024. ...

    2024

  42. [50]

    Andrew J. Fleming. A review of nanometer resolution position sensors: Operation and per- formance. Sensors and Actuators A: Physical , 190:106–126, 2013

    2013

  43. [51]

    A review on locomo- tion robophysics: the study of movement at the intersection of robotics, soft matter and dynam- ical systems

    Jeffrey Aguilar, Tingnan Zhang, Feifei Qian, Mark Kingsbury, Benjamin McInroe, Nicole Ma- zouchova, Chen Li, Ryan Maladen, Chaohui Gong, Matt Travers, et al. A review on locomo- tion robophysics: the study of movement at the intersection of robotics, soft matter and dynam- ica...

    2016

  44. [52]

    Viscoelastic materials

    Roderic S Lakes. Viscoelastic materials. Cam- bridge university press, 2009

    2009

  45. [53]

    Femtosecond laser fabricated nitinol liv- ing hinges for millimeter-sized robots

    Alexander Hedrick, Heiko Kabutz, Lawrence Smith, Robert MacCurdy, and Kaushik Ja- yaram. Femtosecond laser fabricated nitinol liv- ing hinges for millimeter-sized robots. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , 9(6):5449– 5455, 2024

    2024

  46. [54]

    A fabrication strategy for reconfigurable millimeter-scale metamaterials

    Hayley D McClintock, Neel Doshi, Agustin Iniguez-Rabago, James C Weaver, Noah T Jaf- feris, Kaushik Jayaram, Robert J Wood, and Jo- hannes TB Overvelde. A fabrication strategy for reconfigurable millimeter-scale metamaterials. Advanced Functional Materials, 31(46):2103428, 2021

    2021

  47. [55]

    Spider- inspired electrohydraulic actuators for fast, soft-actuated joints

    Nicholas Kellaris, Philipp Rothemund, Yi Zeng, Shane K Mitchell, Garrett M Smith, Kaushik Jayaram, and Christoph Keplinger. Spider- inspired electrohydraulic actuators for fast, soft-actuated joints. Advanced Science , 8(14):2100916, 2021

    2021

  48. [56]

    A lightweight, low-power electroadhe- sive clutch and spring for exoskeleton actua- tion

    Stuart Diller, Carmel Majidi, and Steven H Collins. A lightweight, low-power electroadhe- sive clutch and spring for exoskeleton actua- tion. In 2016 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pages 682–

    2016

  49. [57]

    High force density textile electrostatic clutch

    Ronan Hinchet and Herbert Shea. High force density textile electrostatic clutch. Advanced Materials Technologies, 5(4):1900895, 2020

    2020

  50. [58]

    Vision substitution by tactile image projec- tion

    Paul Bach-y Rita, Carter C Collins, Frank A Saunders, Benjamin White, and Lawrence Scad- den. Vision substitution by tactile image projec- tion. Nature, 221(5184):963–964, 1969

    1969

  51. [59]

    A survey of image classification methods and techniques for improving classification performance

    Dengsheng Lu and Qihao Weng. A survey of image classification methods and techniques for improving classification performance. Interna- tional journal of Remote sensing , 28(5):823–870, 2007

    2007

  52. [60]

    Deep convo- lutional neural networks for image classification: A comprehensive review

    Waseem Rawat and Zenghui Wang. Deep convo- lutional neural networks for image classification: A comprehensive review. Neural computation , 29(9):2352–2449, 2017

    2017

  53. [61]

    Biomimetic vibrissal sensing for robots

    Martin J Pearson, Ben Mitchinson, J Charles Sullivan, Anthony G Pipe, and Tony J Prescott. Biomimetic vibrissal sensing for robots. Philo- sophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Bi- ological Sciences, 366(1581):3085–3096, 2011

    2011

  54. [62]

    Bioinspired, Multifunctional, Active Whisker Sensors for Tactile Sensing of Mobile Robots

    Zhiqiang Yu, Yue Guo, Jiaji Su, Qiang Huang, Toshio Fukuda, Changyong Cao, and Qing Shi. Bioinspired, Multifunctional, Active Whisker Sensors for Tactile Sensing of Mobile Robots. IEEE Robotics and Automation Let- ters, 7(4):9565–9572, October 2022. Conference Name: IEEE Robot...

    2022

  55. [63]

    Sponberg, O.Y

    Jusuk Lee, S.N. Sponberg, O.Y. Loh, A.G. Lam- perski, R.J. Full, and N.J. Cowan. Templates and Anchors for Antenna-Based Wall Following in Cockroaches and Robots. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 24(1):130–143, February 2008

    2008

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.