Method and apparatus for modulating haptic feedback

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 11768540
  • Patent Number
    11,768,540
  • Date Filed
    Monday, December 20, 2021
    2 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, September 26, 2023
    a year ago
Abstract
The present invention concerns a method and apparatus for the modulation of an acoustic field for providing tactile sensations. A method of creating haptic feedback using ultrasound is provided. The method comprises the steps of generating a plurality of ultrasound waves with a common focal point using a phased array of ultrasound transducers, the common focal point being a haptic feedback point, and modulating the generation of the ultrasound waves using a waveform selected to produce little or no audible sound at the haptic feedback point.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION

The present invention concerns a method and apparatus for the modulation of an acoustic field for providing tactile sensations. More particularly, but not exclusively, this invention concerns a method and apparatus for the modulation of an acoustic field for providing tactile sensations in order to provide an improved user experience.


BACKGROUND

Various interactive haptic technologies exist, which provide a user or users with tactile information or feedback, often in combination with visual information displayed on an interactive screen. For example, previous haptic feedback devices include pins moving to physically change a deformable surface. A pen connected to an articulated arm may be provided, as in the SensAble PHANTOM device. Alternatively, a user may wear, for example in the form of a glove, one or more actuators which are activated to provide haptic feedback to a user. However, in each of these technologies, a user requires physical contact with a deformable surface, a pen, or a specially adapted glove. Such requirements reduce the usability and spontaneity with which a user may interact with a system.


Tactile sensations on human skin can be created by using a phased array of ultrasound transducers to exert an acoustic radiation force on a target in mid-air. Ultrasound waves are transmitted by the transducers, with the phase emitted by each transducer adjusted such that the waves arrive concurrently at the target point in order to maximise the acoustic radiation force exerted.


Ultrasound haptic feedback systems create a vibrotactile sensation upon the skin of a user of the system. The focussed ultrasound creates enough force at the point of intersection to slightly displace the skin of a user. Typically, ultrasound haptic feedback systems use ultrasound with a frequency at or above 40 kHz, which is above the threshold for receptors in the skin to feel. Therefore, a user can only detect the onset and cessation of such focussed ultrasound. In order to provide a sensation that is detectable by the receptors in skin, the focussed ultrasound is modulated at a lower frequency, within the detectable range of the receptors. This range is typically from 1 Hz to 500 Hz.


A side effect of the modulation is that the ultrasound breaks down and creates a sound at the modulation frequency. Therefore, when creating tactile feedback with a 200 Hz modulation frequency, a 200 Hz sound is also produced. This audible sound may be annoying to users and is a barrier to ultrasound haptic technology being adopted.


The present invention seeks to mitigate the above-mentioned problems. Alternatively or additionally, the present invention seeks to provide an improved haptic feedback system.


SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

The present invention provides, according to a first aspect, a method of creating haptic feedback using ultrasound comprising the steps of:


generating a plurality of ultrasound waves with a common focal point using a phased array of ultrasound transducers, the common focal point being a haptic feedback point,


modulating the generation of the ultrasound waves using a waveform selected to produce little or no audible sound at the haptic feedback point.


The method may comprise the step of generating a plurality of common focal points, each common focal point being a haptic feedback point.


The production of little or no audible sound at a haptic feedback point is dependent on both the loudness of any sound produced, together with the frequency at which any sound is produced. A small amount of audible sound may be produced, and considered acceptable. The acceptability of the sound produced by the creation of haptic feedback may be dependent on the background noise audible at the haptic feedback point. In a noisy environment, the acceptable level of sound produced at the haptic feedback point may be greater than the acceptable level of sound produced in a quiet environment. Therefore, the intended use of the haptic feedback system creating the haptic feedback and the environment in which the system is located will determine the acceptable level of sound production.


At high intensities, ultrasound becomes non-linear. This non-linear behaviour allows the creation of haptic feedback but also causes the audible sound produced in haptic feedback systems. An example of the effect of the non-linearity of ultrasound waves is utilising the effect to create highly directive audible sound with parametric speakers. The sound is produced due to the second derivative of the p2 term of the Westervelt equation.













2


p

+


δ

c
0
4







3


p




t
3




+


β


ρ
0



c
0
4








2



p
2





t
2




-


1

c
0
2







2


p




t
2





=
0




(

Eq
.




1

)








Where p is the sound pressure, which in the case of the invention is the difference between the instantaneous sound pressure at a point and the ambient sound pressure.


In the case of existing haptic feedback systems, a modulated phased array produces ultrasound modulated with a simple square wave pattern, i.e. the array is switched on and off at the modulation frequency. Therefore, the p2 term is generating an approximate square wave at the focal point of the phased array with a frequency that matches the modulation frequency. The square wave generated by the non-linear breakdown of the ultrasound will create a relatively loud noise and is off putting to a user of such a haptic feedback system.


In order to reduce or eliminate the audible noise, the applicant has realised it is necessary to avoid sharp changes in sound pressure level throughout the acoustic field. These sharp changes in pressure, as demonstrated by the square wave example above, are turned into oscillations by the non-linear medium. By smoothing out the changes in sound pressure level, the sound produced may be reduced to a lower and/or inaudible level. The sound pressure may be continuously changed. The sound pressure may be continuously changed with the first derivative of the rate of change also being continuous. The sound pressure may be continuously changed with the second derivative of the rate of change being continuous. The maximum rate of change of sound pressure may be dependent on a number of factors, including the variability of threshold hearing of humans with frequency of sound waves, and factors such as the temperature and humidity of air in which the wave is being produced. The generation of haptic feedback may be “tuned” in order that any sound produced is suitably low for the intended use of the haptic feedback system.


Alternatively or additionally, the sound produced by the method may last only a very short time. As humans do not perceive sounds that last only very briefly, this can effectively make the sound produced inaudible.


One possible way of reducing the sound produced may be to avoid turning the transducers off, and therefore avoid the emission of acoustic energy rapidly switching between 0% and 100% as in a square wave modulation. The method may comprise the step of varying the position of the common focal point. The position of the common focal point may be constantly varied. The position of the common focal point may oscillate about a central focal point. For example, the phase delays of a phased array could be altered to defocus and refocus ultrasound to a feedback point at the modulation frequency. The sound pressure level emitted by an individual transducer in a phased array is small compared to the sound pressure level at the focal point, and so there will still be a large change in sound pressure at the focal point. Therefore, this solution may have a relatively small effect.


The method may comprise the step of avoiding sharp pressure changes at the focal point. The modulation may comprise selecting a waveform that is an interpolation of the transducer phases and amplitudes. The detailed description shows various interpolated waveforms and the waveforms that are produced at the focal point by the non-linear breakdown of the ultrasound. The waveforms may be interpolated between a fully on and fully off state. The interpolation curves may be generalised between any two transducer phase and amplitude configurations. The interpolation may be a linear interpolation. The interpolation may be a polynomial or trigonometric interpolation, such as a cosine interpolation. The interpolation may be a parametric speaker interpolation, arranged to result in a sinusoidal waveform being generated at the focal point. The parametric speaker interpolation may, for example, be according to the same equation as that used to encode a sinusoid into a parametric speaker beam to remove distortion. An example of such an equation can be found in Pompei (2002) “Sound from Ultrasound: The Parametric Array as an Audible Sound Source”, Ph.D. MIT:US, Eq 3.9. The interpolated waveform may produce smoother waveforms at the focal point than the square wave modulation of the prior art.


The invention provides, according to a second aspect, a haptic feedback system comprising:


a phased array comprising a plurality of transducers arranged to emit ultrasound to create a haptic feedback point,


the phased array arranged to emit ultrasound according to a modulation waveform having a shape that produces little or no sound when the ultrasound converges at the haptic feedback point.


The haptic feedback system may comprise a control unit. The haptic feedback system may comprise a driving unit. The driving unit may be arranged to drive the transducer to produce ultrasound. The control unit may be arranged to send control signals to the driving unit. The control unit may include a memory. The control unit may be arranged to modulate the output of the transducer according to a particular modulation waveform. The modulation waveform may be linear. The modulation waveform may be a polynomial or trigonometric interpolation, for example, a cosine interpolation. The modulation waveform may correspond to a parabolic speaker interpolation. The control unit may be a PC or other suitable computer device.


According to a third aspect, the invention provides a computer program product, the computer program comprising a series of instructions, the series of instructions such that when run on a control unit associated with a haptic feedback system according to the second aspect of the invention, the haptic feedback system operates such that the method steps according to the first aspect of the invention are carried out.


It will of course be appreciated that features described in relation to one aspect of the present invention may be incorporated into other aspects of the present invention. For example, the method of the invention may incorporate any of the features described with reference to the apparatus of the invention and vice versa.





DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

Embodiments of the present invention will now be described by way of example only with reference to the accompanying schematic drawings of which:



FIG. 1 shows a schematic view of a haptic feedback system according to a first embodiment of the invention;



FIG. 2 shows a prior art square wave modulation pattern and the resultant waveform produced at the focal point;



FIG. 3 shows a linear interpolation modulation pattern and the resultant waveform produced at the focal point according to a second aspect of the invention;



FIG. 4 shows a cosine interpolation modulation pattern and the resultant waveform produced at the focal point according to a third aspect of the invention;



FIG. 5 shows a parametric speaker interpolation modulation pattern and the resultant waveform produced at the focal point according to a fourth aspect of the invention;



FIG. 6 shows an acoustic field generated at a focal point by a cosine interpolation modulation;



FIG. 7 shows an acoustic field generated at a focal point by a parametric speaker interpolation modulation; and



FIG. 8 shows an acoustic field generated at a focal point by a square wave modulation.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

In an example embodiment of the method, firstly the 3D position of a focal point is decided. A phased array is arranged to create an acoustic field, with the phases and amplitudes of each transducer calculated to achieve a high pressure at the focal point and a low pressure in surrounding areas. Two states then exist, firstly the focal point state, with the computed phases and amplitudes, and secondly the off state, with all of the transducers of a phased array set at zero amplitude. A frequency at which to modulate the feedback is then chosen in dependence on the desired feel of the feedback. Then a modulation waveform is chosen at the desired frequency, the modulation frequency chosen to minimise or reduce the audible sound produced at the focal point. An example modulation waveform is a cosine waveform. The modulation waveform is then applied to the operation of the transducers to interpolate between the two states identified above.


A more specific example, as applied to a particular haptic feedback system, is now described with reference to FIG. 1.



FIG. 1 shows an example haptic feedback system 10 comprising a transducer array 12, a screen 14, a projector 16, a hand tracker 20, a PC 22, a driving unit 24, and a user's hand 26. The system 10 is shown to illustrate the invention, which is in no way limited to a particular system for producing haptic feedback using ultrasound. The transducer array 12 is located underneath the screen 14 and arranged such that pressure patterns may be transmitted through the screen 14 to a region above the screen 14. In this particular embodiment, the transducer array comprises 320 muRata MA40S4S transducers arranged in a 16×20 grid formation. Each transducer unit is 10 mm in diameter and the transducers are positioned with no gap between them in order to minimise the transducer array 12 footprint. The transducers produce a large amount of sound pressure (20 Pascals of pressure at a distance of 30 cm) and have a wide angle of directivity (60 degrees). The transducers are arranged to transmit ultrasound waves at a frequency of 40 kHz. The projector 16 is arranged to project visual information onto the screen 14 from above the screen 14 as shown. In an alternative embodiment, the projector may be placed between the transducer array and the screen, with the projection coming from below the screen.


A user interacts with this visual information and the movement and position of the user's hand 26 is tracked by the hand tracker 20. In this particular embodiment, the hand tracker 20 is a Leap Motion controller arranged to provide the 3D coordinates of the user's fingertips and palm at up to 200 frames per second. The system 10 is controlled by a PC 22, which sends control data to the projector 16, receives user data from the hand tracker 20, and controls the drive unit 24 for driving the transducer array 12. The PC 22 controls the driving unit 24 such that a pressure pattern is created in the region above the transducer array 12. In response to the hand movements of a user, the PC 22 may drive the driving unit 24 to cause the transducer array 12 to change the pressure pattern forms d above the transducer array 12.


In order to compute the amplitude and phase of the acoustic wave each acoustic transducer must transmit for the desired pressure pattern to be created, an algorithm adapted from that proposed by Gavrilov (“The possibility of generating focal regions of complex configurations in application to the problems of stimulation of human receptor structures by focused ultrasound”, L. R. Gavrilov, 2008, Acoustical Physics Volume. 54, Issue 2, pp 269-273, Print ISSN 1063-7710) may be used. A volumetric box is defined above the transducer array 12. Within the box, a plurality of control points are defined. The control points may represent points where a maximum pressure value is desired, or points where minimum pressure values are desired. The pressure values are maximised or minimised by maximising or minimising the intensity of the ultrasound emitted by the transducer array 12 which is incident at the control points.


An algorithm is used to model the outputs of each of the transducers in the transducer array 12 required to obtain each of the desired pressure patterns which may be created within the volume defined above the transducer array 12. The algorithm may be split into three steps.


Firstly, the acoustic field generated by a single transducer is calculated to create a large modelled volume. Thereby, the phase and amplitude at any point within the modelled volume may be determined by offsetting the sample transducer for the position, phase, and amplitude, of each of the transducers in the real transducer array, and combining these values.


Secondly, the control points are defined in the 3D volume above the transducer array such that the control points take on the required distribution. The control points may be points of maximum intensity or minimum intensity (also known as null points). In addition to a 3D location, the desired modulation frequency of the maximum control points may be specified. Thirdly, the optimal phases are calculated using a minimum norm solver so that the resulting acoustic field is as close as possible to that specified by the control points. There may be more than one solution that will create an optimal focussing to the control points, but some solutions create a higher intensity than others. Solutions are therefore iteratively generated to find the one that creates the highest intensity.


The method according to an aspect of the invention comprises obtaining a modulation frequency that produces the required tactile sensation. For example, a relatively slow modulation frequency of 16 Hz would provide a slow, pulsing, sensation. A higher modulation frequency of 200 Hz would produce a near-continuous feeling. A modulation waveform is then selected at that frequency, which produces little or no audible sound at the feedback point. The modulation waveform may comprise an interpolation based on the required phase and amplitude of the waveform calculated as described above.



FIGS. 2 to 6 show a graph on the left hand side which represents the modulation waveform applied to the ultrasound emitted by an ultrasound transducer. The graph on the right hand side of the figures represents the audible waveform created at the focal point of the ultrasound transducer. Generally, the greater the amplitude and the more jagged the feedback waves created at the focal point, the louder the sound being produced will be.


In prior art systems, the modulation of the ultrasound corresponds to a simple square wave pattern, as shown in the graph on the left hand side of FIG. 2, where the array of transducers is simply turned on and off at the modulation frequency. The graph on the right hand side of FIG. 2 shows the waveform produced at the focal point of the ultrasound transducer when using a square wave modulation pattern. As is clear, the waveform is far from smooth and also the amplitude of the waveform is relatively high. This will result in a potentially loud and irritating sound being produced a the focal point of the haptic feedback system.



FIG. 3 shows an alternative modulation waveform, where the ultrasound is varied according to a linear interpolation. As can be seen in the graph on the right hand side of FIG. 3, the waveform produced at the focal point is smoother than that shown in FIG. 2, with an amplitude which is significantly smaller. Therefore, the sound produced at the focal point will be reduced compared to a square wave modulation.



FIG. 4 shows an alternative modulation waveform, where the ultrasound is varied according to a cosine interpolation. As can be seen in the graph on the right hand side of FIG. 4, the waveform produced at the focal point is smoother than that shown in FIG. 2, with an amplitude which is significantly smaller. Therefore, the sound produced at the focal point will be reduced compared to a square wave modulation.



FIG. 5 shows an alternative modulation waveform, where the ultrasound is varied according to a parametric speaker interpolation. As can be seen in the graph on the right hand side of FIG. 5, the waveform produced at the focal point is smoother than that shown in FIG. 2, with an amplitude which is significantly smaller. Therefore, the sound produced at the focal point will be reduced compared to the square wave modulation.



FIGS. 6, 7, and 8, show the acoustic field of audible waveforms that is produced from different modulation waveforms when a focal point is created from five point sources. The waveform at various points throughout the field are highlighted for comparison. FIG. 6 represents a cosine interpolation, FIG. 7 represents a parametric speaker interpolation, and FIG. 8 represents a square wave modulation method. As can be seen, FIG. 6 shows the smoothest, most uniform field. FIG. 7 shows a field which is not as smooth and uniform as FIG. 6, though still considerably smoother and more uniform than that shown in FIG. 8. Therefore it is evident that the cosine interpolation provides the optimum modulation compared to the others discussed. On investigation, the skilled person may discover alternative modulation waveforms which perform as well as or better than a cosine interpolation, whilst still falling within the scope of the present invention.


Whilst the present invention has been described and illustrated with reference to particular embodiments, it will be appreciated by those of ordinary skill in the art that the invention lends itself to many different variations not specifically illustrated herein.


Where in the foregoing description, integers or elements are mentioned which have known, obvious or foreseeable equivalents, then such equivalents are herein incorporated as if individually set forth. Reference should be made to the claims for determining the true scope of the present invention, which should be construed so as to encompass any such equivalents. It will also be appreciated by the reader that integers or features of the invention that are described as preferable, advantageous, convenient or the like are optional and do not limit the scope of the independent claims. Moreover, it is to be understood that such optional integers or features, whilst of possible benefit in some embodiments of the invention, may not be desirable, and may therefore be absent, in other embodiments.

Claims
  • 1. A method comprising: creating a pressure pattern with a plurality of transducers using ultrasound, comprising:1) offsetting a first transducer of the plurality of transducers for a position, phase, and amplitude of each of the plurality of transducers other than the first transducer to produce an instance of iterative transducer offset data; and2) determining a phase and an amplitude of a point within a model volume by combining instances of iterative transducer offset data.
  • 2. The method as in claim 1, wherein offsetting the first transducer for the phase and amplitude of each of the plurality of transducers other than the first transducer involves interpolation.
  • 3. The method as in claim 2, wherein the interpolation is a linear interpolation.
  • 4. The method as in claim 2, wherein the interpolation is selected from a group consisting of a polynomial interpolation and a trigonometric interpolation.
  • 5. The method as in claim 4, wherein the group consisting of a polynomial interpolation and a trigonometric interpolation is a cosine interpolation.
  • 6. The method as in claim 2, wherein the interpolation is a parametric speaker interpolation.
  • 7. The method as in claim 6, wherein the parametric speaker interpolation comprises encoding a sinusoid into a parametric speaker beam to remove distortion.
  • 8. The method as in claim 1, wherein the pressure pattern produces haptic feedback.
  • 9. The method as in claim 1, wherein audio noise is reduced at the pressure pattern.
  • 10. The method as in claim 1, further comprising: varying the position of the pressure pattern.
  • 11. A system comprising: a set of transducers creating an interpolation between:(1) a first target pressure pattern associated with a first phase and amplitude configuration; and(2) a second target pressure pattern associated with a second phase and amplitude configuration.
  • 12. The system as in claim 11, wherein the interpolation is a linear interpolation.
  • 13. The system as in claim 11, wherein the interpolation is selected from a group consisting of a polynomial interpolation and a trigonometric interpolation.
  • 14. The system as in claim 13, wherein the group consisting of a polynomial interpolation and a trigonometric interpolation is a cosine interpolation.
  • 15. The system as in claim 11, wherein the interpolation is a parametric speaker interpolation.
  • 16. The system as in claim 11, further comprising a control unit.
  • 17. The system as in claim 11, further comprising a driving unit.
  • 18. The system as in claim 17, wherein the driving unit is arranged to drive the transducer to produce ultrasound.
  • 19. The system as in claim 16, further comprising a control unit arranged to send control signals to the driving unit.
  • 20. The system as in claim 16, wherein the control unit includes a memory.
Priority Claims (1)
Number Date Country Kind
1415923 Sep 2014 GB national
REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS

The present application is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 16/600,500, filed Oct. 13, 2012, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 15/966,213, filed Apr. 30, 2018, which is a continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/916,179, filed Mar. 2, 2016, which is a U.S. national phase of PCT Application No. PCT/GB2015/052578 filed Sep. 7, 2015, which claims benefit of United Kingdom Application No. 1415923.0, filed Sep. 9, 2014. All the above-referenced applications are incorporated herein by reference.

US Referenced Citations (349)
Number Name Date Kind
4218921 Berge Aug 1980 A
4760525 Webb Jul 1988 A
4771205 Mequio Sep 1988 A
4881212 Takeuchi Nov 1989 A
5226000 Moses Jul 1993 A
5235986 Maslak Aug 1993 A
5243344 Koulopoulos Sep 1993 A
5329682 Thurn Jul 1994 A
5371834 Tawel Dec 1994 A
5422431 Ichiki Jun 1995 A
5426388 Flora Jun 1995 A
5477736 Lorraine Dec 1995 A
5511296 Dias Apr 1996 A
5729694 Holzrichter Mar 1998 A
5859915 Norris Jan 1999 A
6029518 Oeftering Feb 2000 A
6193936 Gardner Feb 2001 B1
6216538 Yasuda Apr 2001 B1
6436051 Morris Aug 2002 B1
6503204 Sumanaweera Jan 2003 B1
6647359 Verplank Nov 2003 B1
6771294 Pulli Aug 2004 B1
6772490 Toda Aug 2004 B2
6800987 Toda Oct 2004 B2
7107159 German Sep 2006 B2
7109789 Spencer Sep 2006 B2
7182726 Williams Feb 2007 B2
7225404 Zilles May 2007 B1
7284027 Jennings, III Oct 2007 B2
7345600 Fedigan Mar 2008 B1
7487662 Schabron Feb 2009 B2
7497662 Mollmann Mar 2009 B2
7577260 Hooley Aug 2009 B1
7692661 Cook Apr 2010 B2
RE42192 Schabron Mar 2011 E
7966134 German Jun 2011 B2
8000481 Nishikawa Aug 2011 B2
8123502 Blakey Feb 2012 B2
8269168 Axelrod Sep 2012 B1
8279193 Birnbaum Oct 2012 B1
8351646 Fujimura Jan 2013 B2
8369973 Risbo Feb 2013 B2
8594350 Hooley Nov 2013 B2
8607922 Werner Dec 2013 B1
8782109 Tsutsui Jul 2014 B2
8823674 Birnbaum Sep 2014 B2
8833510 Koh Sep 2014 B2
8884927 Cheatham, III Nov 2014 B1
9208664 Peters Dec 2015 B1
9267735 Funayama Feb 2016 B2
9421291 Robert Aug 2016 B2
9612658 Subramanian Apr 2017 B2
9662680 Yamamoto May 2017 B2
9667173 Kappus May 2017 B1
9816757 Zielinski Nov 2017 B1
9841819 Carter Dec 2017 B2
9863699 Corbin, III Jan 2018 B2
9898089 Subramanian Feb 2018 B2
9945818 Ganti Apr 2018 B2
9958943 Long May 2018 B2
9977120 Carter May 2018 B2
10101811 Carter Oct 2018 B2
10101814 Carter Oct 2018 B2
10133353 Eid Nov 2018 B2
10140776 Schwarz Nov 2018 B2
10146353 Smith Dec 2018 B1
10168782 Tchon Jan 2019 B1
10268275 Carter Apr 2019 B2
10281567 Carter May 2019 B2
10318008 Sinha Jun 2019 B2
10444842 Long Oct 2019 B2
10469973 Hayashi Nov 2019 B2
10496175 Long Dec 2019 B2
10497358 Tester Dec 2019 B2
10510357 Kovesi Dec 2019 B2
10520252 Momen Dec 2019 B2
10523159 Megretski Dec 2019 B2
10531212 Long Jan 2020 B2
10535174 Rigiroli Jan 2020 B1
10569300 Hoshi Feb 2020 B2
10593101 Han Mar 2020 B1
10657704 Han May 2020 B1
10685538 Carter Jun 2020 B2
10755538 Carter Aug 2020 B2
10818162 Carter Oct 2020 B2
10911861 Buckland Feb 2021 B2
10915177 Carter Feb 2021 B2
10921890 Subramanian Feb 2021 B2
10930123 Carter Feb 2021 B2
10943578 Long Mar 2021 B2
11048329 Lee Jun 2021 B1
11098951 Kappus Aug 2021 B2
11113860 Rigiroli Sep 2021 B2
11169610 Sarafianou Nov 2021 B2
11189140 Long Nov 2021 B2
11204644 Long Dec 2021 B2
11276281 Carter Mar 2022 B2
11531395 Kappus Dec 2022 B2
11543507 Carter Jan 2023 B2
11550395 Beattie Jan 2023 B2
11550432 Carter Jan 2023 B2
11553295 Kappus Jan 2023 B2
20010007591 Pompei Jul 2001 A1
20010033124 Norris Oct 2001 A1
20020149570 Knowles Oct 2002 A1
20030024317 Miller Feb 2003 A1
20030144032 Brunner Jul 2003 A1
20030182647 Radeskog Sep 2003 A1
20040005715 Schabron Jan 2004 A1
20040014434 Haardt Jan 2004 A1
20040052387 Norris Mar 2004 A1
20040091119 Duraiswami May 2004 A1
20040210158 Organ Oct 2004 A1
20040226378 Oda Nov 2004 A1
20040264707 Yang Dec 2004 A1
20050052714 Klug Mar 2005 A1
20050056851 Althaus Mar 2005 A1
20050148874 Brock-Fisher Jul 2005 A1
20050212760 Marvit Sep 2005 A1
20050226437 Pellegrini Oct 2005 A1
20050267695 German Dec 2005 A1
20050273483 Dent Dec 2005 A1
20060085049 Cory Apr 2006 A1
20060090955 Cardas May 2006 A1
20060091301 Trisnadi May 2006 A1
20060164428 Cook Jul 2006 A1
20070036492 Lee Feb 2007 A1
20070094317 Wang Apr 2007 A1
20070177681 Choi Aug 2007 A1
20070214462 Boillot Sep 2007 A1
20070236450 Colgate Oct 2007 A1
20070263741 Erving Nov 2007 A1
20080012647 Risbo Jan 2008 A1
20080027686 Mollmann Jan 2008 A1
20080084789 Altman Apr 2008 A1
20080130906 Goldstein Jun 2008 A1
20080152191 Fujimura Jun 2008 A1
20080226088 Aarts Sep 2008 A1
20080273723 Hartung Nov 2008 A1
20080300055 Lutnick Dec 2008 A1
20090093724 Pernot Apr 2009 A1
20090116660 Croft, III May 2009 A1
20090232684 Hirata Sep 2009 A1
20090251421 Bloebaum Oct 2009 A1
20090319065 Risbo Dec 2009 A1
20100013613 Weston Jan 2010 A1
20100016727 Rosenberg Jan 2010 A1
20100030076 Vortman Feb 2010 A1
20100044120 Richter Feb 2010 A1
20100066512 Rank Mar 2010 A1
20100085168 Kyung Apr 2010 A1
20100103246 Schwerdtner Apr 2010 A1
20100109481 Buccafusca May 2010 A1
20100199232 Mistry Aug 2010 A1
20100231508 Cruz-Hernandez Sep 2010 A1
20100262008 Roundhill Oct 2010 A1
20100302015 Kipman Dec 2010 A1
20100321216 Jonsson Dec 2010 A1
20110006888 Bae Jan 2011 A1
20110010958 Clark Jan 2011 A1
20110051554 Varray Mar 2011 A1
20110066032 Vitek Mar 2011 A1
20110199342 Vartanian Aug 2011 A1
20110310028 Camp, Jr. Dec 2011 A1
20120057733 Morii Mar 2012 A1
20120063628 Rizzello Mar 2012 A1
20120066280 Tsutsui Mar 2012 A1
20120223880 Birnbaum Sep 2012 A1
20120229400 Birnbaum Sep 2012 A1
20120229401 Birnbaum Sep 2012 A1
20120236689 Brown Sep 2012 A1
20120243374 Dahl Sep 2012 A1
20120249409 Toney Oct 2012 A1
20120249474 Pratt Oct 2012 A1
20120299853 Dagar Nov 2012 A1
20120307649 Park Dec 2012 A1
20120315605 Cho Dec 2012 A1
20130035582 Radulescu Feb 2013 A1
20130079621 Shoham Mar 2013 A1
20130094678 Scholte Apr 2013 A1
20130100008 Marti Apr 2013 A1
20130101141 McElveen Apr 2013 A1
20130173658 Adelman Jul 2013 A1
20130331705 Fraser Dec 2013 A1
20140027201 Islam Jan 2014 A1
20140104274 Hilliges Apr 2014 A1
20140139071 Yamamoto May 2014 A1
20140168091 Jones Jun 2014 A1
20140201666 Bedikian Jul 2014 A1
20140204002 Bennet Jul 2014 A1
20140265572 Siedenburg Sep 2014 A1
20140267065 Levesque Sep 2014 A1
20140269207 Baym Sep 2014 A1
20140269208 Baym Sep 2014 A1
20140269214 Baym Sep 2014 A1
20140270305 Baym Sep 2014 A1
20140320436 Modarres Oct 2014 A1
20140361988 Katz Dec 2014 A1
20140369514 Baym Dec 2014 A1
20150002477 Cheatham, III Jan 2015 A1
20150005039 Liu Jan 2015 A1
20150006645 Oh Jan 2015 A1
20150007025 Sassi Jan 2015 A1
20150013023 Wang Jan 2015 A1
20150019299 Harvey Jan 2015 A1
20150022466 Levesque Jan 2015 A1
20150029155 Lee Jan 2015 A1
20150066445 Lin Mar 2015 A1
20150070147 Cruz-Hernandez Mar 2015 A1
20150070245 Han Mar 2015 A1
20150078136 Sun Mar 2015 A1
20150081110 Houston Mar 2015 A1
20150084929 Lee Mar 2015 A1
20150110310 Minnaar Apr 2015 A1
20150130323 Harris May 2015 A1
20150168205 Lee Jun 2015 A1
20150192995 Subramanian Jul 2015 A1
20150209564 Lewin Jul 2015 A1
20150220199 Wang Aug 2015 A1
20150226537 Schorre Aug 2015 A1
20150226831 Nakamura Aug 2015 A1
20150241393 Ganti Aug 2015 A1
20150248787 Abovitz Sep 2015 A1
20150258431 Stafford Sep 2015 A1
20150277610 Kim Oct 2015 A1
20150293592 Cheong Oct 2015 A1
20150304789 Babayoff Oct 2015 A1
20150323667 Przybyla Nov 2015 A1
20150331576 Piya Nov 2015 A1
20150332075 Burch Nov 2015 A1
20160019762 Levesque Jan 2016 A1
20160019879 Daley Jan 2016 A1
20160026253 Bradski Jan 2016 A1
20160044417 Clemen, Jr. Feb 2016 A1
20160124080 Carter May 2016 A1
20160138986 Carlin May 2016 A1
20160175701 Froy Jun 2016 A1
20160175709 Idris Jun 2016 A1
20160189702 Blanc Jun 2016 A1
20160242724 Lavallee Aug 2016 A1
20160246374 Carter Aug 2016 A1
20160249150 Carter Aug 2016 A1
20160291716 Boser Oct 2016 A1
20160306423 Uttermann Oct 2016 A1
20160320843 Long Nov 2016 A1
20160339132 Cosman Nov 2016 A1
20160374562 Vertikov Dec 2016 A1
20170002839 Bukland Jan 2017 A1
20170004819 Ochiai Jan 2017 A1
20170018171 Carter Jan 2017 A1
20170024921 Beeler Jan 2017 A1
20170052148 Estevez Feb 2017 A1
20170123487 Hazra May 2017 A1
20170123499 Eid May 2017 A1
20170140552 Woo May 2017 A1
20170144190 Hoshi May 2017 A1
20170153707 Subramanian Jun 2017 A1
20170168586 Sinha Jun 2017 A1
20170181725 Han Jun 2017 A1
20170193768 Long Jul 2017 A1
20170193823 Jiang Jul 2017 A1
20170211022 Reinke Jul 2017 A1
20170236506 Przybyla Aug 2017 A1
20170270356 Sills Sep 2017 A1
20170279951 Hwang Sep 2017 A1
20170336860 Smoot Nov 2017 A1
20170366908 Long Dec 2017 A1
20180035891 Van Soest Feb 2018 A1
20180039333 Carter Feb 2018 A1
20180047259 Carter Feb 2018 A1
20180074580 Hardee Mar 2018 A1
20180081439 Daniels Mar 2018 A1
20180101234 Carter Apr 2018 A1
20180139557 Ochiai May 2018 A1
20180146306 Benattar May 2018 A1
20180151035 Maalouf May 2018 A1
20180166063 Long Jun 2018 A1
20180181203 Subramanian Jun 2018 A1
20180182372 Tester Jun 2018 A1
20180190007 Panteleev Jul 2018 A1
20180246576 Long Aug 2018 A1
20180253627 Baradel Sep 2018 A1
20180267156 Carter Sep 2018 A1
20180304310 Long Oct 2018 A1
20180309515 Murakowski Oct 2018 A1
20180310111 Kappus Oct 2018 A1
20180350339 Macours Dec 2018 A1
20180361174 Radulescu Dec 2018 A1
20190001129 Rosenbluth Jan 2019 A1
20190038496 Levesque Feb 2019 A1
20190091565 Nelson Mar 2019 A1
20190163275 Iodice May 2019 A1
20190175077 Zhang Jun 2019 A1
20190187244 Riccardi Jun 2019 A1
20190196578 Iodice Jun 2019 A1
20190196591 Long Jun 2019 A1
20190197840 Kappus Jun 2019 A1
20190197841 Carter Jun 2019 A1
20190197842 Long Jun 2019 A1
20190204925 Long Jul 2019 A1
20190206202 Carter Jul 2019 A1
20190235628 Lacroix Aug 2019 A1
20190257932 Carter Aug 2019 A1
20190310710 Deeley Oct 2019 A1
20190342654 Buckland Nov 2019 A1
20200042091 Long Feb 2020 A1
20200080776 Kappus Mar 2020 A1
20200082804 Kappus Mar 2020 A1
20200103974 Carter Apr 2020 A1
20200117229 Long Apr 2020 A1
20200193269 Park Jun 2020 A1
20200218354 Beattie Jul 2020 A1
20200257371 Sung Aug 2020 A1
20200294299 Rigiroli Sep 2020 A1
20200302760 Carter Sep 2020 A1
20200320347 Nikolenko Oct 2020 A1
20200327418 Lyons Oct 2020 A1
20200380832 Carter Dec 2020 A1
20210037332 Kappus Feb 2021 A1
20210043070 Carter Feb 2021 A1
20210109712 Long Apr 2021 A1
20210111731 Long Apr 2021 A1
20210112353 Brian Apr 2021 A1
20210141458 Sarafianou May 2021 A1
20210165491 Sun Jun 2021 A1
20210170447 Buckland Jun 2021 A1
20210183215 Carter Jun 2021 A1
20210201884 Kappus Jul 2021 A1
20210225355 Long Jul 2021 A1
20210303072 Carter Sep 2021 A1
20210303758 Long Sep 2021 A1
20210334706 Yamaguchi Oct 2021 A1
20210381765 Kappus Dec 2021 A1
20210397261 Kappus Dec 2021 A1
20220035479 Lasater Feb 2022 A1
20220083142 Brown Mar 2022 A1
20220095068 Kappus Mar 2022 A1
20220155949 Ring May 2022 A1
20220198892 Carter Jun 2022 A1
20220236806 Carter Jul 2022 A1
20220252550 Catsis Aug 2022 A1
20220300028 Long Sep 2022 A1
20220300070 Iodice Sep 2022 A1
20220329250 Long Oct 2022 A1
20220393095 Chilles Dec 2022 A1
20230036123 Long Feb 2023 A1
20230075917 Pittera Mar 2023 A1
20230117919 Iodice Apr 2023 A1
20230124704 Rorke Apr 2023 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (70)
Number Date Country
2470115 Jun 2003 CA
2909804 Nov 2014 CA
101986787 Mar 2011 CN
102459900 May 2012 CN
102591512 Jul 2012 CN
103797379 May 2014 CN
103984414 Aug 2014 CN
107340871 Nov 2017 CN
107407969 Nov 2017 CN
107534810 Jan 2018 CN
0057594 Aug 1982 EP
309003 Mar 1989 EP
0696670 Feb 1996 EP
1875081 Jan 2008 EP
1911530 Apr 2008 EP
2271129 Jan 2011 EP
1461598 Apr 2014 EP
3207817 Aug 2017 EP
3216231 Aug 2019 EP
3916525 Dec 2021 EP
2464117 Apr 2010 GB
2513884 Nov 2014 GB
2513884 Nov 2014 GB
2530036 Mar 2016 GB
2008074075 Apr 2008 JP
2010109579 May 2010 JP
2011172074 Sep 2011 JP
2012048378 Mar 2012 JP
2012048378 Mar 2012 JP
5477736 Apr 2014 JP
2015035657 Feb 2015 JP
2016035646 Mar 2016 JP
2017168086 Sep 2017 JP
6239796 Nov 2017 JP
20120065779 Jun 2012 KR
20130055972 May 2013 KR
1020130055972 May 2013 KR
20160008280 Jan 2016 KR
20200082449 Jul 2020 KR
9118486 Nov 1991 WO
9639754 Dec 1996 WO
03050511 Jun 2003 WO
2005017965 Feb 2005 WO
2007144801 Dec 2007 WO
2009071746 Jun 2009 WO
2009112866 Sep 2009 WO
2010003836 Jan 2010 WO
2010139916 Dec 2010 WO
2011132012 Oct 2011 WO
2012023864 Feb 2012 WO
2012104648 Aug 2012 WO
2013179179 Dec 2013 WO
2014181084 Nov 2014 WO
2015006467 Jan 2015 WO
2015039622 Mar 2015 WO
2015127335 Aug 2015 WO
2015194510 Dec 2015 WO
2016007920 Jan 2016 WO
2016073936 May 2016 WO
2016095033 Jun 2016 WO
2016099279 Jun 2016 WO
2016132141 Aug 2016 WO
2016132144 Aug 2016 WO
2016137675 Sep 2016 WO
2016162058 Oct 2016 WO
2017172006 Oct 2017 WO
2018109466 Jun 2018 WO
2020049321 Mar 2020 WO
2021130505 Jul 2021 WO
2021260373 Dec 2021 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (340)
Entry
Aksel Sveier et al.,Pose Estimation with Dual Quaternions and Iterative Closest Point, 2018 Annual American Control Conference (ACC) (8 pages).
JP Office Action for JP 2020-534355 (dated Dec. 6, 2022) (8 pages).
Ken Wada, Ring Buffer Basics (2013) 6 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Feb. 23, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 18/060,556 (pp. 1-10).
Office Action (Final Rejection) dated Mar. 21, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/995,819 (pp. 1-7).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Mar. 1, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/564,016 (pp. 1-10).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Mar. 22, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/354,636 (pp. 1-5).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Apr. 19, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 18/066,267 (pp. 1-11).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Apr. 27, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/229,091 (pp. 1-5).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated May 8, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 18/065,603 (pp. 1-17).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated May 10, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/477,536 (pp. 1-13).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Mar. 8, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/721,315 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Mar. 15, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/134,505 (pp. 1-5).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Mar. 24, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/080,840 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Apr. 4, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/409,783 (pp. 1-5).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Apr. 6, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/807,730 (pp. 1-7).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Apr. 28, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/195,795 (pp. 1-7).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated May 12, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/229,091 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated May 24, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/229,091 (pp. 1-2).
Office Action dated Feb. 9, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 18/060,556 (pp. 1-5).
Office Action dated Mar. 3, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 18/060,525 (pp. 1-12).
Office Action dated Apr. 19, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 18/066,267 (pp. 1-11).
Partial ISR for PCT/GB2023/050001 (dated Mar. 31, 2023) 13 pages.
Rakkolainen et al., A Survey of Mid-Air Ultrasound Haptics and Its Applications (IEEE Transactions on Haptics), vol. 14, No. 1, 2021, 18 pages.
E.S. Ebbini et al. (1991), A spherical-section ultrasound phased array applicator for deep localized hyperthermia, Biomedical Engineering, IEEE Transactions on (vol. 38 Issue: 7), pp. 634-643.
Gavrilov, L.R. (2008) “The Possibility of Generating Focal Regions of Complex Configurations in Application to the Problems of Stimulation of Human Receptor Structures by Focused Ultrasound” Acoustical Physics, vol. 54, No. 2, pp. 269-278.
Mingzhu Lu et al. (2006) Design and experiment of 256-element ultrasound phased array for noninvasive focused ultrasound surgery, Ultrasonics, vol. 44, Supplement, Dec. 22, 2006, pp. e325-e330.
Gavrilov L R et al (2000) “A theoretical assessment of the relative performance of spherical phased arrays for ultrasound surgery” Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control, IEEE Transactions on (vol. 47, Issue: 1), pp. 125-139.
Pompei, F.J. (2002), “Sound from Ultrasound: The Parametric Array as an Audible Sound Source”, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (132 pages).
Hasegawa, K. and Shinoda, H. (2013) “Aerial Display of Vibrotactile Sensation with High Spatial-Temporal Resolution using Large Aperture Airbourne Ultrasound Phased Array”, University of Tokyo (6 pages).
Hoshi T et al, “Noncontact Tactile Display Based on Radiation Pressure of Airborne Ultrasound”, IEEE Transactions on Haptics, IEEE, USA, (Jul. 1, 2010), vol. 3, No. 3, ISSN 1939-1412, pp. 155-165.
Yoshino, K. and Shinoda, H. (2013), “Visio Acoustic Screen for Contactless Touch Interface with Tactile Sensation”, University of Tokyo (5 pages).
Kamakura, T. and Aoki, K. (2006) “A Highly Directional Audio System using a Parametric Array in Air” WESPAC IX 2006 (8 pages).
Alexander, J. et al. (2011), Adding Haptic Feedback to Mobile TV (6 pages).
Tom Carter et al., “UltraHaptics: Multi-Point Mid-Air Haptic Feedback for Touch Surfaces”, Proceedings of the 26th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Technology, UIST '13, New York, New York, USA, (Jan. 1, 2013), ISBN 978-1-45-032268-3, pp. 505-514.
Search Report for GB1308274.8 dated Nov. 11, 2013. (2 pages).
Iwamoto T et al, “Two-dimensional Scanning Tactile Display using Ultrasound Radiation Pressure”, Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, 2006 14th Symposium on Alexandria, VA, USA Mar. 25-26, 2006, Piscataway, NJ, USA,IEEE, (Mar. 25, 2006), ISBN 978-1-4244-0226-7, pp. 57-61.
Iwamoto et al. (2008), Non-contact Method for Producing Tactile Sensation Using Airborne Ultrasound, EuroHaptics, pp. 504-513.
Search report for PCT/GB2015/052578 dated Oct. 26, 2015 (12 pages).
Marzo et al., Holographic acoustic elements for manipulation of levitated objects, Nature Communications DOI: 10.1038/ncomms9661 (2015) (7 pages).
Search report for PCT/GB2014/051319 dated Dec. 8, 2014 (4 pages).
Search Report for GB1415923.0 dated Mar. 11, 2015. (1 page).
Marshall, M ., Carter, T., Alexander, J., & Subramanian, S. (2012). Ultratangibles: creating movable tangible objects on interactive tables. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, (pp. 2185-2188).
Obrist et al., Talking about Tactile Experiences, CHI 2013, Apr. 27-May 2, 2013 (10 pages).
Benjamin Long et al., “Rendering volumetric haptic shapes in mid-air using ultrasound”, ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), ACM, US, (Nov. 19, 2014), vol. 33, No. 6, ISSN 0730-0301, pp. 1-10.
Freeman et al., Tactile Feedback for Above-Device Gesture Interfaces: Adding Touch to Touchless Interactions ICMI'14, Nov. 12-16, 2014, Istanbul, Turkey (8 pages).
Obrist et al., Emotions Mediated Through Mid-Air Haptics, CHI 2015, Apr. 18-23, 2015, Seoul, Republic of Korea. (10 pages).
Wilson et al., Perception of Ultrasonic Haptic Feedback on the Hand: Localisation and Apparent Motion, CHI 2014, Apr. 26-May 1, 2014, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (10 pages).
Phys.org, Touchable Hologram Becomes Reality, Aug. 6, 2009, by Lisa Zyga (2 pages).
Iwamoto et al., Airborne Ultrasound Tactile Display: Supplement, The University of Tokyo 2008 (2 pages).
Hoshi, T., Development of Aerial-Input and Aerial-Tactile-Feedback System, IEEE World Haptics Conference 2011, p. 569-573.
EPSRC Grant summary EP/J004448/1 (2011) (1 page).
Hoshi, T., Handwriting Transmission System Using Noncontact Tactile Display, IEEE Haptics Symposium 2012 pp. 399-401.
Takahashi, M. et al., Large Aperture Airborne Ultrasound Tactile Display Using Distributed Array Units, SICE Annual Conference 2010 p. 359-62.
Hoshi, T., Non-contact Tactile Sensation Synthesized by Ultrasound Transducers, Third Joint Euro haptics Conference and Symposium on Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems 2009 (5 pages).
Tom Nelligan and Dan Kass, Intro to Ultrasonic Phased Array (date unknown) (8 pages).
Light, E.D., Progress in Two Dimensional Arrays for Real Time Volumetric Imaging, 1998 (17 pages).
Casper et al., Realtime Control of Multiple-focus Phased Array Heating Patterns Based on Noninvasive Ultrasound Thermography, IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. Jan. 2012; 59(1): 95-105.
Hoshi, T., Touchable Holography, SIGGRAPH 2009, New Orleans, Louisiana, Aug. 3-7, 2009. (1 page).
Sylvia Gebhardt, Ultrasonic Transducer Arrays for Particle Manipulation (date unknown) (2 pages).
Search report and Written Opinion of ISA for PCT/GB2015/050417 dated Jul. 8, 2016 (20 pages).
Search report and Written Opinion of ISA for PCT/GB2015/050421 dated Jul. 8, 2016 (15 pages).
Search report and Written Opinion of ISA for PCT/GB2017/050012 dated Jun. 8, 2017. (18 pages).
Oscar Martinez-Graullera et al., “2D array design based on Fermat spiral for ultrasound imaging”, Ultrasonics, (Feb. 1, 2010), vol. 50, No. 2, ISSN 0041-624X, pp. 280-289, XP055210119.
Search Report for PCT/GB2017/052332 dated Oct. 10, 2017 (12 pages).
Canada Application 2,909,804 Office Action dated Oct. 18, 2019, 4 pages.
A. Sand, Head-Mounted Display with Mid-Air Tactile Feedback, Proceedings of the 21st ACM Symposium on Virtual Reality Software and Technology, Nov. 13-15, 2015 (8 pages).
E. Bok, Metasurface for Water-to-Air Sound Transmission, Physical Review Letters 120, 044302 (2018) (6 pages).
K. Jia, Dynamic properties of micro-particles in ultrasonic transportation using phase-controlled standing waves, J. Applied Physics 116, n. 16 (2014) (12 pages).
Marco A B Andrade et al, “Matrix method for acoustic levitation simulation”, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control, IEEE, US, (Aug. 1, 2011), vol. 58, No. 8, ISSN 0885-3010, pp. 1674-1683.
M. Barmatz et al, “Acoustic radiation potential on a sphere in plane, cylindrical, and spherical standing wave fields”, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, New York, NY, US, (Mar. 1, 1985), vol. 77, No. 3, pp. 928-945, XP055389249.
M. Toda, New Type of Matching Layer for Air-Coupled Ultrasonic Transducers, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelecthcs, and Frequency Control, vol. 49, No. 7, Jul. 2002 (8 pages).
Search Report for PCT/GB/2017/053729 dated Mar. 15, 2018 (16 pages).
Search Report for PCT/GB/2017/053880 dated Mar. 21, 2018. (13 pages).
Xin Cheng et al, “Computation of the acoustic radiation force on a sphere based on the 3-D FDTD method”, Piezoelectricity, Acoustic Waves and Device Applications (SPAWDA), 2010 Symposium on, IEEE, (Dec. 10, 2010), ISBN 978-1-4244-9822-2, pp. 236-239.
Yang Ling et al, “Phase-coded approach for controllable generation of acoustical vortices”, Journal of Applied Physics, American Institute of Physics, US, vol. 113, No. 15, ISSN 0021-8979, (Apr. 21, 2013), pp. 154904-154904.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion issued in corresponding PCT/US2017/035009, dated Dec. 4, 2018, 8 pages.
“Welcome to Project Soli” video, https://atap.google.com/#project-soli Accessed Nov. 30, 2018, 2 pages.
Colgan, A., “How Does the Leap Motion Controller Work?” Leap Motion, Aug. 9, 2014, 10 pages.
Corrected Notice of Allowability dated Jun. 21, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,213 (2 pages).
Damn Geeky, “Virtual projection keyboard technology with haptic feedback on palm of your hand,” May 30, 2013, 4 pages.
Definition of “Interferometry” according to Wikipedia, 25 pages., Retrieved Nov. 2018.
Definition of “Multilateration” according to Wikipedia, 7 pages., Retrieved Nov. 2018.
Definition of “Trilateration” according to Wikipedia, 2 pages., Retrieved Nov. 2018.
EPO Office Action for EP16708440.9 dated Sep. 12, 2018 (7 pages).
Ex Parte Quayle Action dated Dec. 28, 2018 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,213 (pp. 1-7).
Gokturk, et al., “A Time-of-Flight Depth Sensor-System Description, Issues and Solutions,” Published in: 2004 Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshop, Date of Conference: Jun. 27-Jul. 2, 2004, 9 pages.
Iddan, et al., “3D Imaging in the Studio (and Elsewhwere . . . ” Apr. 2001, 3DV systems Ltd., Yokneam, Isreal, www.3dvsystems.com.il, 9 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for Application No. PCT/EP2017/069569 dated Feb. 5, 2019, 11 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/GB2018/053739, dated Jun. 4, 2019, 16 pages.
Japanese Office Action (with English language translation) for Application No. 2017-514569, dated Mar. 31, 2019, 10 pages.
Kolb, et al., “Time-of-Flight Cameras in Computer Graphics,” Computer Graphics forum, vol. 29 (2010), No. 1, pp. 141-159.
Krim, et al., “Two Decades of Array Signal Processing Research—The Parametric Approach”, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, Jul. 1996, pp. 67-94.
Lang, Robert, “3D Time-of-Flight Distance Measurement with Custom Solid-State Image Sensors in CMOS/CCD—Technology”, A dissertation submitted to Department of EE and CS at Univ. of Siegen, dated Jun. 28, 2000, 223 pages.
Li, Larry, “Time-of-Flight Camera—An Introduction,” Texas Instruments, Technical White Paper, SLOA190B—Jan. 2014 Revised May 2014, 10 pages.
Meijster, A., et al., “A General Algorithm for Computing Distance Transforms in Linear Time,” Mathematical Morphology and its Applications to Image and Signal Processing, 2002, pp. 331-340.
Notice of Allowance dated Dec. 19, 2018 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/665,629 (pp. 1-9).
Notice of Allowance dated Dec. 21, 2018 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/983,864 (pp. 1-7).
Notice of Allowance dated Feb. 7, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/851,214 (pp. 1-7).
Notice of Allowance dated Jul. 31, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/851,214 (pp. 1-9).
Notice of Allowance dated Jul. 31, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/296,127 (pp. 1-9).
Notice of Allowance dated May 30, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,213 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action dated Apr. 18, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/296,127 (pags 1-6).
Office Action dated Apr. 4, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/897,804 (pp. 1-10).
Office Action dated Feb. 20, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/623,516 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action dated Jul. 10, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/210,661 (pp. 1-12).
Office Action dated Jul. 26, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/159,695 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action dated May 16, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/396,851 (pp. 1-7).
PCT Partial International Search Report for Application No. PCT/GB2018/053404 dated Feb. 25, 2019, 13 pages.
Péter Tamás Kovács et al, “Tangible Holographic 3D Objects with Virtual Touch”, Interactive Tabletops & Surfaces, ACM, 2 Penn Plaza, Suite 701 New York NY 10121-0701 USA, (Nov. 15, 2015), ISBN 978-1-4503-3899-8, pp. 319-324.
Schmidt, Ralph, “Multiple Emitter Location and Signal Parameter Estimation” IEEE Transactions of Antenna and Propagation, vol. AP-34, No. 3, Mar. 1986, pp. 276-280.
Search report for PCT/GB2018/051061 dated Sep. 26, 2018 (17 pages).
Search report for PCT/US2018/028966 dated Jul. 13, 2018 (43 pages).
Sixth Sense webpage, http://www.pranavmistry.com/projects/sixthsense/ Accessed Nov. 30, 2018, 7 pages.
Steve Guest et al., “Audiotactile interactions in roughness perception”, Exp. Brain Res (2002) 146:161-171, DOI 10.1007/s00221-002-1164-z, Received: Feb. 9, 2002/Accepted: May 16, 2002/ Published online: Jul. 26, 2002, Springer-Verlag 2002, (11 pages).
Takahashi Dean: “Ultrahaptics shows off sense of touch in virtual reality”, Dec. 10, 2016 (Dec. 10, 2016), XP055556416, Retrieved from the Internet: URL: https://venturebeat.com/2016/12/10/ultrahaptics-shows-off-sense-of-touch-in-virtual-reality/ [retrieved on Feb. 13, 2019] 4 pages.
Xu Hongyi et al, “6-DoF Haptic Rendering Using Continuous Collision Detection between Points and Signed Distance Fields”, IEEE Transactions on Haptics, IEEE, USA, vol. 10, No. 2, ISSN 1939-1412, (Sep. 27, 2016), pp. 151-161, (Jun. 16, 2017).
Zeng, Wejun, “Microsoft Kinect Sensor and Its Effect,” IEEE Multimedia, Apr.-Jun. 2012, 7 pages.
Office Action dated Aug. 22, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/160,862 (pp. 1-5).
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/GB2019/050969, dated Jun. 13, 2019, 15 pages.
Extended European Search Report for Application No. EP19169929.7, dated Aug. 6, 2019, 7 pages.
Office Action dated Oct. 7, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/396,851 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action dated Oct. 17, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/897,804 (pp. 1-10).
Corrected Notice of Allowability dated Oct. 31, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/623,516 (pp. 1-2).
Office Action dated Oct. 31, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/671,107 (pp. 1-6).
Office Action dated Mar. 20, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/210,661 (pp. 1-10).
Notice of Allowance dated Jun. 17, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/210,661 (pp. 1-9).
European Office Action for Application No. EP16750992.6, dated Oct. 2, 2019, 3 pages.
Office Action dated Dec. 11, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/959,266 (pp. 1-15).
Jager et al., “Air-Coupled 40-KHZ Ultrasonic 2D-Phased Array Based on a 3D-Printed Waveguide Structure”, 2017 IEEE, 4 pages.
Wooh et al., “Optimum beam steering of linear phased arays,” Wave Motion 29 (1999) pp. 245-265, 21 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Feb. 10, 2020, for U.S. Appl. No. 16/160,862 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action dated Feb. 25, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/960,113 (pp. 1-7).
Office Action dated Feb. 7, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/159,695 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action dated Jan. 29, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (p. 1-6).
Office Action dated Jan. 10, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,767 (pp. 1-6).
Yaroslav Ganin et al., Domain-Adversarial Training of Neural Networks, Journal of Machine Learning Research 17 (2016) 1-35, submitted 5/15; published 4/16.
Yaroslav Ganin et al., Unsupervised Domain Adaptataion by Backpropagation, Skolkovo Institute of Science and Technology (Skoltech), Moscow Region, Russia, Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning, Lille, France, 2015, JMLR: W&CP vol. 37, copyright 2015 by the author(s), 11 pages.
Ashish Shrivastava et al., Learning from Simulated and Unsupervised Images through Adversarial Training, Jul. 19, 2017, pp. 1-16.
Konstantinos Bousmalis et al., Domain Separation Networks, 29th Conference on Neural Information Processing Sysgtems (NIPS 2016), Barcelona, Spain. Aug. 22, 2016, pp. 1-15.
Eric Tzeng et al., Adversarial Discriminative Domain Adaptation, Feb. 17, 2017, pp. 1-10.
David Joseph Tan et al., Fits like a Glove: Rapid and Reliable Hand Shape Personalization, 2016 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 5610-5619.
Jonathan Taylor et al., Efficient and Precise Interactive Hand Tracking Through Joint, Continuous Optimization of Pose and Correspondences, SIGGRAPH '16 Technical Paper, Jul. 24-28, 2016, Anaheim, CA, ISBN: 978-1-4503-4279-87/16/07, pp. 1-12.
Toby Sharp et al., Accurate, Robust, and Flexible Real-time Hand Tracking, CHI '15, Apr. 18-23, 2015, Seoul, Republic of Korea, ACM 978-1-4503-3145-6/15/04, pp. 1-10.
Jonathan Taylor et al., Articulated Distance Fields for Ultra-Fast Tracking of Hands Interacting, ACM Transactions on Graphics, vol. 36, No. 4, Article 244, Publication Date: Nov. 2017, pp. 1-12.
GitHub—IntelRealSense/hand_tracking_samples: researc codebase for depth-based hand pose estimation using dynamics based tracking and CNNs, Mar. 26, 2020, 3 pages.
Stan Melax et al., Dynamics Based 3D Skeletal Hand Tracking, May 22, 2017, pp. 1-8.
Yarin Gal et al., Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learning, Oct. 4, 2016, pp. 1-12, Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning, New York, NY, USA, 2016, JMLR: W&CP vol. 48.
Kaiming He et al., Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition, http://image-net.org/challenges/LSVRC/2015/ and http://mscoco.org/dataset/#detections-challenge2015, Dec. 10, 2015, pp. 1-12.
Sergey Ioffe et al., Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariat Shift, Mar. 2, 2015, pp. 1-11.
Diederik P. Kingma et al., Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization, Jan. 30, 2017, pp. 1-15.
Christoper M. Bishop, Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning, 2006, pp. 1-758.
Markus Oberweger et al., DeepPrior++: Improving Fast and Accurate 3D Hand Pose Estimation, Aug. 28, 2017, pp. 1-10.
Markus Oberweger et al., Hands Deep in Deep Learning for Hand Pose Estimation, Dec. 2, 2016, pp. 1-10.
Mahdi Rad et al., Feature Mapping for Learning Fast and Accurate 3D Pose Inference from Synthetic Images, Mar. 26, 2018, pp. 1-14.
Jonathan Tompson et al., Real-Time Continuous Pose Recovery of Human Hands Using Convolutional Networks, ACM Trans. Graph. 33, 5, Article 169, Aug. 2014, pp. 1-10.
Vincent Lepetit et al., Model Based Augmentation and Testing of an Annotated Hand Pose Dataset, ResearchGate, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/307910344, Sep. 2016, 13 pages.
Shome Subhra Das, Detectioin of Self Intersection in Synthetic Hand Pose Generators, 2017 Fifteenth IAPR International Conference on Machine Vision Applications (MVA), Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan, May 8-12, 2017, pp. 354-357.
Marin, About LibHand, LibHand—A Hand Articulation Library, www.libhand.org/index.html, Mar. 26, 2020, pp. 1-2; www.libhand.org/download.html, 1 page; www.libhand.org/examples.html, pp. 1-2.
GitHub—danfis/libccd: Library for collision detection between two convex shapes, Mar. 26, 2020, pp. 1-6.
OGRECave/ogre—GitHub: ogre/Samples/Media/materials at 7de80a7483f20b50f2b10d7ac6de9d9c6c87d364, Mar. 26, 2020, 1 page.
Shanxin Yuan et al., BigHand2.2M Bechmark: Hand Pose Dataset and State of the Art Analysis, Dec. 9, 2017, pp. 1-9.
Office Action dated Apr. 8, 2020, for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (pp. 1-17).
Office Action dated Apr. 16, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/839,184 (pp. 1-8).
Notice of Allowance dated Apr. 22, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/671,107 (pp. 1-5).
Office Action dated Apr. 17, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/401,148 (pp. 1-15).
Office Action dated Apr. 28, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/396,851 (pp. 1-12).
Office Action dated Apr. 29, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/374,301 (pp. 1-18).
Nina Gaissert, Christian Wallraven, and Heinrich H. Bulthoff, “Visual and Haptic Perceptual Spaces Show High Similarity in Humans”, published to Journal of Vision in 2010, available at http://www.journalofvision.org/content/10/11/2 and retrieved on Apr. 22, 2020 ( Year: 2010), 20 pages.
Hua J, Qin H., Haptics-based dynamic implicit solid modeling, IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. Sep.-Oct. 2004;10(5):574-86.
Hilleges et al. Interactions in the air: adding further depth to interactive tabletops, UIST '09: Proceedings of the 22nd annual ACM symposium on User interface software and technologyOct. 2009 pp. 139-148.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/GB2019/051223, dated Aug. 8, 2019, 15 pages.
Partial International Search Report for Application No. PCT/GB2018/053735, dated Apr. 12, 2019, 14 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/GB2018/053738, dated Apr. 11, 2019, 14 pages.
Sean Gustafson et al., “Imaginary Phone”, Proceedings of the 24th Annual ACM Symposium on User Interface Software and Techology: Oct. 16-19, 2011, Santa Barbara, CA, USA, ACM, New York, NY, Oct. 16, 2011, pp. 283-292, XP058006125, DOI: 10.1145/2047196.2047233, ISBN: 978-1-4503-0716-1.
Office Action dated May 18, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/960,113 (pp. 1-21).
Optimal regularisation for acoustic source reconstruction by inverse methods, Y. Kim, P.A. Nelson, Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, University of Southampton, Southampton, SO17 1BJ, UK Received Feb. 25, 2003; 25 pages.
Takayuki et al., “Noncontact Tactile Display Based on Radiation Pressure of Airborne Ultrasound” IEEE Transactions on Haptics vol. 3, No. 3, p. 165 (2010).
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/GB2019/052510, dated Jan. 14, 2020, 25 pages.
Partial ISR for Application No. PCT/GB2020/050013 dated May 19, 2020 (16 pages).
Search report for PCT/GB2015/052507 dated Mar. 11, 2020 (19 pages).
Search report for PCT/GB2015/052916 dated Feb. 26, 2020 (18 pages).
Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 15/210,661 dated Jun. 17, 2020 (22 pages).
Aoki et al., Sound location of stero reproduction with parametric loudspeakers, Applied Acoustics 73 (2012) 1289-1295 (7 pages).
Bajard et al., BKM: A New Hardware Algorithm for Complex Elementary Functions, 8092 IEEE Transactions on Computers 43 (1994) (9 pages).
Bajard et al., Evaluation of Complex Elementary Functions / A New Version of BKM, SPIE Conference on Advanced Signal Processing, Jul. 1999 (8 pages).
Bortoff et al., Pseudolinearization of the Acrobot using Spline Functions, IEEE Proceedings of the 31st Conference on Decision and Control, Sep. 10, 1992 (6 pages).
Bożena Smagowska & Małgorzata Pawlaczyk-Łuszczyńska (2013) Effects of Ultrasonic Noise on the Human Body—A Bibliographic Review, International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics, 19:2, 195-202.
Brian Kappus and Ben Long, Spatiotemporal Modulation for Mid-Air Haptic Feedback from an Ultrasonic Phased Array, ICSV25, Hiroshima, Jul. 8-12, 2018, 6 pages.
Corrected Notice of Allowability dated Jan. 14, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/897,804 (pp. 1-2).
Georgiou et al., Haptic In-Vehicle Gesture Controls, Adjunct Proceedings of the 9th International ACM Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI '17), Sep. 24-27, 2017 (6 pages).
Imaginary Phone: Learning Imaginary Interfaces by Transferring Spatial Memory From a Familiar Device Sean Gustafson, Christian Holz and Patrick Baudisch. UIST 2011. (10 pages).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2020/050013 (dated Jul. 13, 2020) (20 pages).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2020/050926 (dated Jun. 2, 2020) (16 pages).
Large et al.,Feel the noise: Mid-air ultrasound haptics as a novel human-vehicle interaction paradigm, Applied Ergonomics (2019) (10 pages).
Mueller, GANerated Hands for Real-Time 3D Hand Tracking from Monocular RGB, Eye in-Painting with Exemplar Generative Adverserial Networks, pp. 49-59 (Jun. 1, 2018).
Notice of Allowance dated Jun. 25, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/396,851 (pp. 1-10).
Notice of Allowance dated Oct. 1, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/897,804 (pp. 1-9).
Notice of Allowance dated Oct. 16, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/159,695 (pp. 1-7).
Notice of Allowance dated Oct. 30, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/839,184 (pp. 1-9).
Notice of Allowance dated Oct. 6, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/699,629 (pp. 1-8).
Notice of Allowance dated Sep. 30, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/401,148 (pp. 1-10).
Office Action dated Dec. 7, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/563,608 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action dated Jul. 9, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,760 (pp. 1-17).
Office Action dated Jun. 19, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/699,629 (pp. 1-12).
Office Action dated Jun. 25, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,767 (pp. 1-27).
Office Action dated Mar. 11, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,767 (pp. 1-23).
Office Action dated Sep. 18, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/396,851 (pp. 1-14).
Office Action dated Sep. 21, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (pp. 1-17).
Rocchesso et al., Accessing and Selecting Menu Items by In-Air Touch, ACM CHItaly'19, Sep. 23-25, 2019, Padova, Italy (9 pages).
Search Report by EPO for EP 17748466 dated Jan. 13, 2021 (16 pages).
Seungryul, Pushing the Envelope for RGB-based Dense 3D Hand Pose Estimation for RGB-based Desne 3D Hand Pose Estimation via Neural Rendering, arXiv:1904.04196v2 [cs.CV] Apr. 9, 2019 (5 pages).
Shakeri, G., Williamson, J. H. and Brewster, S. (2018) May the Force Be with You: Ultrasound Haptic Feedback for Mid-Air Gesture Interaction in Cars. In: 10th International ACM Conference on Automotive User Interfaces and Interactive Vehicular Applications (AutomotiveUI 2018) (11 pages).
Teixeira, et al., “A brief introduction to Microsoft's Kinect Sensor,” Kinect, 26 pages, retrieved Nov. 2018.
Wang et al., Device-Free Gesture Tracking Using Acoustic Signals, ACM MobiCom '16, pp. 82-94 (13 pages).
Office Action dated Mar. 31, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,760 (pp. 1-21).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2020/052544 (dated Dec. 18, 2020) (14 pages).
ISR & WO for PCT/GB2020/052545 (dated Jan. 27, 2021) 14 pages.
Notice of Allowance dated Apr. 20, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/563,608 (pp. 1-5).
Hoshi et al., Tactile Presentation by Airborne Ultrasonic Oscillator Array, Proceedings of Robotics and Mechatronics Lecture 2009, Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers; May 24, 2009 (5 pages).
Office Action dated May 14, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (pp. 1-6).
Office Action dated May 13, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/600,500 (pp. 1-9).
ISR for PCT/GB2020/053373 (dated Mar. 26, 2021) (16 pages).
ISR for PCT/GB2020/052546 (dated Feb. 23, 2021) (14 pages).
Notice of Allowance dated Jun. 10, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/092,333 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action dated Jun. 25, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/899,720 (pp. 1-5).
Corrected Notice of Allowability dated Aug. 9, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/396,851 (pp. 1-6).
Notice of Allowance dated Jul. 22, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/600,500 (pp. 1-9).
Supplemental Notice of Allowability dated Jul. 28, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/563,608 (pp. 1-2).
Supplemental Notice of Allowability dated Jul. 28, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/092,333 (pp. 1-2).
Office Action dated Aug. 10, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/564,016 (pp. 1-14).
Office Action dated Aug. 9, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/068,825 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action dated Aug. 19, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/170,841 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action dated Sep. 16, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/600,496 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action dated Sep. 24, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/080,840 (pp. 1-9).
Ryoko Takahashi, Tactile Stimulation by Repetitive Lateral Movement of Midair Ultrasound Focus, Journal of Latex Class Files, vol. 14, No. 8, Aug. 2015.
Hyunjae Gil, Whiskers: Exploring the Use of Ultrasonic Haptic Cues on the Face, CHI 2018, Apr. 21-26, 2018, Montréal, QC, Canada.
Kai Tsumoto, Presentation of Tactile Pleasantness Using Airborne Ultrasound, 2021 IEEE World Haptics Conference (WHC) Jul. 6-9, 2021. Montreal, Canada.
Keisuke Hasegawa, Electronically steerable ultrasound-driven long narrow air stream, Applied Physics Letters 111, 064104 (2017).
Keisuke Hasegawa,,Curved acceleration path of ultrasound-driven air flow, J. Appl. Phys. 125, 054902 (2019).
Keisuke Hasegawa, Midair Ultrasound Fragrance Rendering, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 24, No. 4, Apr. 2018 1477.
Takaaki Kamigaki, Noncontact Thermal and Vibrotactile Display Using Focused Airborne Ultrasound, EuroHaptics 2020, LNCS 12272, pp. 271-278, 2020.
Mohamed Yacine Tsalamlal, Affective Communication through Air Jet Stimulation: Evidence from Event-Related Potentials, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 2018.
Amanda Zimmerman, The gentle touch receptors of mammalian skin, Science, Nov. 21, 2014, vol. 346 Issue 6212, p. 950.
A. B. Vallbo, Receptive field characteristics of tactile units with myelinated afferents in hairy skin of human subjects, Journal of Physiology (1995), 483.3, pp. 783-795.
Henrik Bruus, Acoustofluidics 2: Perturbation theory and ultrasound resonance modes, Lab Chip, 2012, 12, 20-28.
Tomoo Kamakura, Acoustic streaming induced in focused Gaussian beams, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97(5), Pt. 1, May 1995 p. 2740.
Mitsuru Nakajima, Remotely Displaying Cooling Sensation via Ultrasound-Driven Air Flow, Haptics Symposium 2018, San Francisco, USA p. 340.
Line S Loken, Coding of pleasant touch by unmyelinated afferents in humans, Nature Neuroscience vol. 12 [ No. 5 [ May 2009 547.
Stanley J. Bolanowski, Hairy Skin: Psychophysical Channels and Their Physiological Substrates, Somatosensory and Motor Research, vol. 11. No. 3, 1994, pp. 279-290.
Stefan G. Lechner, Hairy Sensation, Physiology 28: 142-150, 2013.
Rochelle Ackerley, Human C-Tactile Afferents Are Tuned to the Temperature of a Skin-Stroking Caress, J. Neurosci., Feb. 19, 2014, 34(8):2879-2883.
India Morrison, The skin as a social organ, Exp Brain Res (2010) 204:305-314.
Mariana von Mohr, The soothing function of touch: affective touch reduces feelings of social exclusion, Scientific Reports, 7: 13516, Oct. 18, 2017.
JonasChatel-Goldman, Touch increases autonomic coupling between romantic partners, Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience Mar. 2014, vol. 8, Article 95.
Uta Sailer, How Sensory and Affective Attributes Describe Touch Targeting C-Tactile Fibers, Experimental Psychology (2020), 67(4), 224-236.
EPO Examination Search Report 17 702 910.5 (dated Jun. 23, 2021).
Office Action dated Oct. 29, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (pp. 1-7).
Notice of Allowance dated Nov. 5, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/899,720 (pp. 1-9).
Corrected Notice of Allowability dated Nov. 24, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/600,500 (pp. 1-5).
International Search Report and Written Opinion for App. No. PCT/GB2021/051590, dated Nov. 11, 2021, 20 pages.
Anonymous: “How does Ultrahaptics technology work?—Ultrahaptics Developer Information”, Jul. 31, 2018 (Jul. 31, 2018), XP055839320, Retrieved from the Internet: URL:https://developer.ultrahaptics.com/knowledgebase/haptics-overview/ [retrieved on Sep. 8, 2021].
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Dec. 14, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/170,841 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Dec. 20, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/195,795 (pp. 1-7).
EPO Application 18 725 358.8 Examination Report dated Sep. 22, 2021.
EPO 21186570.4 Extended Search Report dated Oct. 29, 2021.
Almusawi et al., “A new artificial neural network approach in solving inverse kinematics of robotic arm (denso vp6242).” Computational intelligence and neuroscience 2016 (2016). (Year: 2016).
Azad et al., Deep domain adaptation under deep label scarcity. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.08097 (2018) (Year: 2018).
Beranek, L., & Mellow, T. (2019). Acoustics: Sound Fields, Transducers and Vibration. Academic Press.
Boureau et al.,“A theoretical analysis of feature pooling in visual recognition.” In Proceedings of the 27th international conference on machine learning (ICML-10), pp. 111-118. 2010. (Year: 2010).
Bybi, A., Grondel, S., Mzerd, A., Granger, C., Garoum, M., & Assaad, J. (2019). Investigation of cross-coupling in piezoelectric transducer arrays and correction. International Journal of Engineering and Technology Innovation, 9(4), 287.
Certon, D., Felix, N., Hue, P. T. H., Patat, F., & Lethiecq, M. (Oct. 1999). Evaluation of laser probe performances for measuring cross-coupling in 1-3 piezocomposite arrays. In 1999 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium. Proceedings. International Symposium (Cat. No. 99CH37027) (vol. 2, pp. 1091-1094).
Certon, D., Felix, N., Lacaze, E., Teston, F., & Patat, F. (2001). Investigation of cross-coupling in 1-3 piezocomposite arrays. ieee transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control, 48(1), 85-92.
Chang Suk Lee et al., An electrically switchable visible to infra-red dual frequency cholesteric liquid crystal light shutter. J. Mater. Chem. C, 2018, 6, 4243 (7 pages).
Der et al., Inverse kinematics for reduced deformable models. ACM Transactions on graphics (TOG) 25, No. 3 (2006): 1174-1179. (Year: 2006).
DeSilets, C. S. (1978). Transducer arrays suitable for acoustic imaging (No. GL-2833). Stanford Univ CA Edward L Ginzton Lab of Physics.
Duka, “Neural network based inverse kinematics solution for trajectory tracking of a robotic arm.” Procedia Technology 12 (2014) 20-27. (Year: 2014).
Henneberg, J., Gerlach, A., Storck, H., Cebulla, H., & Marburg, S. (2018). Reducing mechanical cross-coupling in phased array transducers using stop band material as backing. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 424, 352-364.
https://radiopaedia.org/articles/physical-principles-of-ultrasound-1?lang=gb (Accessed May 29, 2022).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated May 25, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/843,281 (pp. 1-28).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Jun. 9, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/080,840 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Jun. 27, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (pp. 1-17).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Jun. 27, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/734,479 (pp. 1-13).
Oikonomidis et al., “Efficient model-based 3D tracking of hand articulations using Kinect.” In BmVC, vol. 1, No. 2, p. 3. 2011. (Year: 2011).
Patricio Rodrigues, E., Francisco de Oliveira, T., Yassunori Matuda, M., & Buiochi, F. (Sep. 2019). Design and Construction of a 2-D Phased Array Ultrasonic Transducer for Coupling in Water. In INTER-NOISE and NOISE-CON Congress and Conference Proceedings (vol. 259, No. 4, pp. 5720-5731). Institute of Noise Control Engineering.
Seo et al., “Improved numerical inverse kinematics for human pose estimation,” Opt. Eng. 50(3 037001 (Mar. 1, 2011) https:// doi.org/10.1117/1.3549255 (Year: 2011).
Walter, S., Nieweglowski, K., Rebenklau, L., Wolter, K. J., Lamek, B., Schubert, F., . . . & Meyendorf, N. (May 2008). Manufacturing and electrical interconnection of piezoelectric 1-3 composite materials for phased array ultrasonic transducers. In 2008 31st International Spring Seminar on Electronics Technology (pp. 255-260).
Wang et al., Few-shot adaptive faster r-cnn. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pp. 7173-7182. 2019. (Year: 2019).
ISR & WO for PCT/GB2022/051388 (dated Aug. 30, 2022) (15 pages).
Office Action (Final Rejection) dated Sep. 16, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/404,660 (pp. 1-6).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Aug. 29, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/995,819 (pp. 1-6).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Sep. 21, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/721,315 (pp. 1-10).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Aug. 24, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (pp. 1-6).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Aug. 31, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (pp. 1-2).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Sep. 7, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/068,834 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Sep. 8, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/176,899 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Sep. 12, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/734,479 (pp. 1-7).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Jan. 18, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/899,720 (pp. 1-2).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Jan. 24, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,767 (pp. 1-22).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Jan. 21, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/068,834 (pp. 1-12).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Feb. 11, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,760 (pp. 1-8).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2020/052829 (dated Feb. 10, 2021) (15 pages).
EPO Examination Report 17 748 4656.4 (dated Jan. 12, 2021) (16 pages).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Feb. 28, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/068,825 (pp. 1-7).
Mohamed Yacine Tsalamlal, Non-Intrusive Haptic Interfaces: State-of-the Art Survey, HAID 2013, LNCS 7989, pp. 1-9, 2013.
EPO Communication for Application 18 811 906.9 (dated Nov. 29, 2021) (15 pages).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2021/052415 (dated Dec. 22, 2021) (16 pages).
Gareth Young et al.. Designing Mid-Air Haptic Gesture Controlled User Interfaces for Cars, PACM on Human-Computer Interactions, Jun. 2020 (24 pages).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Mar. 4, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/404,660 (pp. 1-5).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Mar. 7, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/600,496 (pp. 1-5).
Communication Pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC for EP 19723179.8 (dated Feb. 15, 2022).
EPO ISR and WO for PCT/GB2022/050204 (dated Apr. 7, 2022) (15 pages).
IN 202047026493 Office Action dated Mar. 8, 2022.
ISR & WO For PCT/GB2021/052946.
Office Action (Final Rejection) dated Mar. 14, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/564,016 (pp. 1-12).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Mar. 15, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/144,474 (pp. 1-13).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Apr. 1, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/229,091 (pp. 1-10).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated May 2, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/068,831 (pp. 1-10).
Al-Mashhadany, “Inverse Kinematics Problem (IKP) of 6-DOF Manipulator by Locally Recurrent Neural Networks (LRNNs),” Management and Service Science (MASS), International Conference on Management and Service Science., IEEE, Aug. 24, 2010, 5 pages. (Year: 2010).
Guez, “Solution to the inverse kinematic problem in robotics by neural networks.” In Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Neural Networks, 1988. San Diego, California. (Year: 1988) 8 pages.
Invitation to Pay Additional Fees for PCT/GB2022/051821 (Oct. 20, 2022), 15 pages.
Mahboob, “Artificial neural networks for learning inverse kinematics of humanoid robot arms.” MS Thesis, 2015. (Year: 2015) 95 pages.
Office Action (Ex Parte Quayle Action) dated Jan. 6, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/195,795 (pp. 1-6).
Office Action (Final Rejection) dated Jan. 9, 2023 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/144,474 (pp. 1-16).
Office Action (Final Rejection) dated Nov. 18, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,767 (pp. 1-27).
Office Action (Final Rejection) dated Nov. 18, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/068,831 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action (Final Rejection) dated Dec. 8, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/229,091 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action (Final Rejection) dated Dec. 15, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/843,281 (pp. 1-25).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Oct. 17, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/807,730 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Nov. 9, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/454,823 (pp. 1-16).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Nov. 16, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/134,505 (pp. 1-7).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Nov. 16, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/692,852 (pp. 1-4).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Dec. 6, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/409,783 (pp. 1-7).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Dec. 22, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/457,663 (pp. 1-20).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Oct. 31, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/068,834 (pp. 1-2).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Oct. 31, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/176,899 (pp. 1-2).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Nov. 1, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/404,660 (pp. 1-5).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Nov. 2, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/734,479 (pp. 1-2).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Nov. 10, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (pp. 1-2).
Office Action (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Nov. 16, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/404,660 (pp. 1-2).
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20220113806 A1 Apr 2022 US
Continuations (3)
Number Date Country
Parent 16600500 Oct 2019 US
Child 17645305 US
Parent 15966213 Apr 2018 US
Child 16600500 US
Parent 14916179 US
Child 15966213 US