Examples of AEGIS autonomous target selection.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

Demonstrations I, II, and III.

Advertisements

Soft robotic device applied to the RV in a pressure overload model of RHF. Soft robotic device applied to the RV in a pressure overload model of RHF. (A.

Force limits and layout design.

Self-folding triangular devices at two scales.

Degradation of MSP samples in 37°C DPBS solution.

Comparison of predicted and measured forces and moments.

Demonstrations integrated system tests.

Basic design concept of human mimetic humanoid.

Comparing previous simulation work with current study.

TPAD controller schematic and testing for WPC.

TPAD controller performance for three force components.

Soft robotic VAD concept.

Cable-driven system diagram for structure matrix.

Deployment of the septal anchoring system.

Demonstration of MT sorting by integrating the top-down design of PDMS device with the bottom-up design of MT properties. Demonstration of MT sorting by.

Demonstration of high-speed and precise actuation.

Three different types of transfer functions with a codomain of [0,1].

TPAD training protocol.

Tfr cells’ transcriptomic profile distinguishes them from Treg and Tfh cells. Tfr cells’ transcriptomic profile distinguishes them from Treg and Tfh cells.

Examples of AEGIS autonomous target selection.

Workspace comparison of Delta robots.

T2-weighted cross-sectional MR imaging of MSP swarms inside SD rats.

Soft robotic device applied to the left side in a coronary ligation HF model. Soft robotic device applied to the left side in a coronary ligation HF model.

Group data during free walking between sessions 1 and 16.

Visual explanation of the interaction terms.

Soft robotic VAD implementations, control schemes, and HF models.

Cytosolic entry of Lm required for CD8α+ DC recruitment.

Visual explanation of the interaction terms.

AEGIS intelligent targeting compared with blind targeting.

Comparison of repertoire distributions to baseline.

Tukey boxplots overlaid on data points from objective and subjective measures, displaying results from study 1. Tukey boxplots overlaid on data points.

Soft robotic VAD implementations, control schemes, and HF models.

Quasi-static and dynamic trajectories.

Online verification using reachable occupancies.

Examples of AEGIS autonomous pointing refinement.

Illustration of the addressable wireless folding concept.

Force limits and layout design.

Demonstration of MT sorting by integrating the top-down design of PDMS device with the bottom-up design of MT properties. Demonstration of MT sorting by.

Cell viability tests. Cell viability tests. SEM images of (A) MC3T3-E1 cells and (B) MSCs on days 1, 3, and 5 of culture. (C) Survival rates of MC3T3-E1.

T2-weighted cross-sectional MR imaging of MSP swarms inside SD rats.

Source-based CP BCI robotic arm control.

Experimental results for tremor reduction.

Effect of slenderness on optimal shapes.

SoFi system overview. SoFi system overview. (Top, left to right) Soft robotic fish and diver interface module. (Bottom, left to right) Subcomponents of.

Soft robotic device applied to the left side in a coronary ligation HF model. Soft robotic device applied to the left side in a coronary ligation HF model.

Details of an implementation of a mechanism within the control chambers for selective lengthening of the sides of the soft robot. Details of an implementation.

Degradation of MSP samples in 37°C DPBS solution.

Schematic representation of MT sorting under a given electric field.

Soft robotic device applied to the RV in a pressure overload model of RHF. Soft robotic device applied to the RV in a pressure overload model of RHF. (A.

Results of the performance study experiment: Bending (sample size: n = 5). Results of the performance study experiment: Bending (sample size: n = 5). (A)

Deployment of the septal anchoring system.

Simulation results of magnetic driving ability in hepatic artery, portal vein, and hepatic vein. Simulation results of magnetic driving ability in hepatic.

Comparison of predicted and measured forces and moments.

Object manipulations performed by our biohybrid robots.

The prototype and working mechanism.

Results of a representative participant with multiple training sessions. Results of a representative participant with multiple training sessions. Average.

Galloping-like gait with the design of a two-legged robot.

AEGIS autonomous targeting process.

Human Tfr cells do not express CD25.

Fig. 1 Cross-sectional images of He-implanted V/Cu/V samples.

Fig. 2 NH3, NOx, SO2, and NMVOC emission changes triggered by the JJJ clean air policy. NH3, NOx, SO2, and NMVOC emission changes triggered by the JJJ.

Fabrication of metal origami structures.

Fig. 4 Relationships between light and economic parameters.

Jetting phase analysis.

Fig. 4 CO2 emission changes triggered by the JJJ clean air policy.

Fig. 5. High burdens of AA signature mutations and predicted immunogenicity in Taiwan HCCs. High burdens of AA signature mutations and predicted immunogenicity.

Iron line orientation inside the PDMS matrix.

The neuropod cells. The neuropod cells. (Top left) Neuropod cells synapse with sensory neurons in the small intestine, as shown in a confocal microscopy.

Evaluating the performance of the robotic system through comparison with human trackers. Evaluating the performance of the robotic system through comparison.

Comparison of children’s behavior between the three conditions.

Presentation transcript:

Examples of AEGIS autonomous target selection. Examples of AEGIS autonomous target selection. In each, the NavCam field of view available to AEGIS is shown. All targets found by AEGIS are outlined; blue targets were rejected in filtering, and red targets were retained. The top-ranked target is shaded green, and the second-ranked target (if measured) is shaded orange. The NavCam images have been contrast-balanced. Note that objects whose contours intersect the edge of the image are rejected as potential targets by AEGIS. Left to right, top to bottom: Sols 1400, 1417, 1449, 1481, 1516, 1605, 1636, and 1660. R. Francis et al. Sci. Robotics 2017;2:eaan4582 Copyright © 2017 The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works.