Perceptions in a haptic system

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 11550432
  • Patent Number
    11,550,432
  • Date Filed
    Tuesday, February 16, 2021
    3 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, January 10, 2023
    a year ago
Abstract
A system providing various improved perceptions techniques for haptic feedback above interactive surfaces that require no contact with either tools, attachments or the surface itself is described. A range of receptors in a perceiving member which is part of the human body is identified to create substantially uniformly perceivable feedback. A vibration frequency that is in the range of the receptors in the perceiving member is chosen and dynamically altered to create substantially uniformly perceivable feedback throughout the receiving member.
Description
FIELD OF THE DISCLOSURE

The present disclosure relates generally to improved perception techniques in haptic-based systems.


BACKGROUND

Multi-touch surfaces have become common in public settings, with large displays appearing in hotel lobbies, shopping malls and other high foot traffic areas. These systems are able to dynamically change their interface allowing multiple users to interact at the same time and with very little instruction.


There are situations when receiving haptic feedback before touching the surface would be beneficial. These include when vision of the display is restricted, such as while driving, and when the user doesn't want to touch the device, such as when their hands are dirty. Providing feedback above the surface would also allow for an additional information channel alongside the visual.


A mid-air haptic feedback system creates tactile sensations in the air. One way to create mid-air haptic feedback is using ultrasound. A phased array of ultrasonic transducers is used to exert an acoustic radiation force on a target. This continuous distribution of sound energy, which will be referred to herein as an “acoustic field”, is useful for a range of applications, including haptic feedback.


Accordingly, a system that provides various improved perceptions techniques for haptic feedback above interactive surfaces and requires no contact with either tools, attachments or the surface itself is desirable.





BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE FIGURES

The accompanying figures, where like reference numerals refer to identical or functionally similar elements throughout the separate views, together with the detailed description below, are incorporated in and form part of the specification, and serve to further illustrate embodiments of concepts that include the claimed invention, and explain various principles and advantages of those embodiments.



FIG. 1 is a representation of shapes made in a haptic system.



FIG. 2 is an illustration of an example series of five haptic control points simultaneously produced in the plane of interaction.



FIG. 3 is a selection of acoustic field simulations where in the control point is moved through the plane of interaction.



FIG. 4 is an illustrative view of unconstrained and constrained transducers.





Skilled artisans will appreciate that elements in the figures are illustrated for simplicity and clarity and have not necessarily been drawn to scale. For example, the dimensions of some of the elements in the figures may be exaggerated relative to other elements to help to improve understanding of embodiments of the present invention.


The apparatus and method components have been represented where appropriate by conventional symbols in the drawings, showing only those specific details that are pertinent to understanding the embodiments of the present invention so as not to obscure the disclosure with details that will be readily apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art having the benefit of the description herein.


DETAILED DESCRIPTION
I. Challenges of Creating Acoustic Fields in Haptic Systems

It is known to control an acoustic field by defining one or more control points in a space within which the acoustic field may exist. Each control point is assigned an amplitude value equating to a desired amplitude of the acoustic field at the control point. Transducers are then controlled to create an acoustic field exhibiting the desired amplitude at each of the control points.


A. Human Hand Properties


Vibration is detected by mechanoreceptors within the skin. The mechanoreceptors within the skin are responsive to vibrations in the range 0.4 Hz to 500 Hz. The emitted ultrasound may be modulated in order to create vibrations within the optimum frequency range detectable by the human hand. By changing the modulation frequency, it may also change the frequency of the vibration on the hand and this can be used to create different tactile properties. Modulating different focal points at different frequencies can give each point of feedback its own independent “feel”. In this way it is possible to correlate haptic and visual feedback and also attach meaning to noticeably different textures so that information can be transferred to the user via the haptic feedback.


Specifically, when human skin interacts with the acoustic field, vibrations of the skin are interpreted by mechanoreceptors being excited and sending signals to the brain via the nervous system. For example, the palmar surface of the hand has 4 different types of mechanoreceptors, each of which responds to a different range of frequencies. The force required to trigger each of these receptors varies with the frequency of the vibration. For example, the Pacinian corpuscle has its lowest activation threshold at around 200 Hz, while the Meissner corpuscle is most sensitive between 10-50 Hz.


These receptors are distributed in differing densities throughout the skin. For example, a 200 Hz vibration will not feel as strong on the finger tips as on the palm of the hand, due to there being a larger concentration of the Pacinian corpuscle in the hand.


Ultrasound haptic feedback systems create a vibro-tactile sensation upon the skin of a user of the system. The focused 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 focused ultrasound. In order to provide a sensation that is detectable by the receptors in skin, the focused ultrasound is modulated at a lower frequency, within the detectable range of the receptors. This range is typically from 1 Hz to 500 Hz.


When creating a system with mid-air tactile feedback, it is important to select the correct frequency of vibration for the part of skin that is being targeted. For example, if the hand is targeted, a vibration frequency of 110 Hz is a good choice as it can be felt across all parts of the hand, albeit to varying degrees of strength.


B. Transmitting Ultrasound Signals for Haptic Feedback


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 maximize the acoustic radiation force exerted.


By defining one or more control points in space, the acoustic field can be controlled. Each point can be assigned a value equating to a desired amplitude at the control point. A physical set of transducers can then be controlled to create an acoustic field exhibiting the desired amplitude at the control points.


A side effect of this technique 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 can be a barrier to ultrasound haptic technology being adopted.


The optimal conditions for producing an acoustic field of a single frequency can be realized by assigning activation coefficients to represent the initial state of each transducer. However, in order to create haptic feedback, the field can be modulated with a signal of a potentially lower frequency. For example, an acoustic field of 40 kHz may be modulated with a 200 Hz frequency in order to achieve a 200 Hz vibro-tactile effect. Methods to generate this vibro-tactile effect may reduce audible content by smoothly interpolating the transducer activation coefficients between discrete and disjoint sets of control points, resulting in smooth sinusoidal amplitude variations at the control point locations. These sinusoidal amplitude variations cause a pure tone to be generated. A pure tone, although much lower in perceptual loudness than the disparate frequency content caused by abruptly changing the state of the transducers, remains audible.


It is known that the modulation waveform can be shaped to reduce the volume of the audible noise that is created (as described for example in UK Patent Application No. 1415923.0). In general, reducing and avoiding sharp changes in pressure level at the focus will reduce the loudness of the audible sound. For example, modulation with a pure square wave will produce a louder audible sound than modulation with a pure sine wave.


Further, in this acoustic field, one or more control points can be defined. These control points can be amplitude modulated with a signal and as a result produce vibro-tactile feedback in mid-air. An alternative method to produce feedback is to create control points that may not be modulated in amplitude and instead move them around spatially to create spatio-temporal modulation that can be felt. Both methods may be then used separately or together in order to produce sound and different textures.


II. Creating Uniform Feeling in a Haptic System

A. Steps to Create Optimized Haptic Feedback


The steps to create optimized haptic feedback using multiplexed frequencies include the following:


1. Knowing the distribution and frequency response range of receptors in the skin, create uniformly perceivable feedback.


2. Selecting a frequency that is in the range of all receptors.


3. Optimizing the vibration frequencies to not just be perceivable, but the best possible vibration frequency for a strong or high quality feeling.


4. Dynamically adjusting the vibration frequency to always be at the optimal frequency.


5. Multiplexing multiple frequencies to create a vibration that provides an optimum level of strength and quality across the whole target area.


B. Optimization of Haptic Feedback


In order to optimize the quality and perceived strength of the feedback, it is possible to dynamically vary the vibration frequency as the interaction is carried out. For example, in the situation of a tactile threshold, where a hand passes through some fixed plane and has a line of vibration created at the intersection of the hand and that plane, the frequency of the vibration can be adjusted in real time to optimize for the area of the hand currently being vibrated. One possibility is that the fingers receive a 100 Hz vibration while the center of the palm receives a 200 Hz vibration.


This dynamic adjustment is also possible with multiple points of feedback. For example a mid-air array of buttons could be represented by one localized point of vibration in the air for each button. As a hand moves over the array of buttons to explore their position and orientation, the vibration frequency of each button could adjust in real time to match the optimum frequency for the part of the hand it is targeted at.


There are also many situations where dynamic adjustment is not possible or not desirable. For example, the tracking system may not be sophisticated to determine discrete parts of the hand or the required processing power may be too high.


In these situations, it may be possible to multiplex frequencies to provide some uniform coverage across the area of skin being targeted. For example, when targeting a hand, a point of feedback could be multiplexed with both 100 Hz and 200 Hz. The palm would respond strongly to the 200 Hz component while the finger tips would respond strongest to the 100 Hz component. In so doing, a point of feedback that can be uniformly felt across the hand is established.


III. Creating Distinct Shapes and Corners

Using vibrations to generate mid-air haptic shapes leads to difficulties with corners. Haptic edge detection has been shown to require highly localized skin displacement (stretching) and at the ultrasonic frequencies currently used this is not possible. Edges can be reliably detected, but corners are not large enough features to be easily recognizable.


The use of points of high pressure in the ultrasonic field convey vibrations and are called “control points.” They provide local feedback in an area around a wavelength in a small diameter (such as 8.6 mm @ 40 kHz). The control points may be arranged in 3D space programmatically to create the feeling of a shape in space.


There is a de facto maximum density for control points of about two wavelengths (˜2 cm @ 40 kHz) apart, as diminishing returns in fidelity are exchanged for increased noise. This means that when using the curvature-dependent control point density, edge fidelity must be sacrificed in order for corner points to be noticeable. In many situations, even this is not enough to render corners in haptic shapes distinguishable.


To enhance corners, it is possible to warps the edges of the shape inwards to emphasize corners in space, creating a haptic representation accentuated in a fashion that enables the perception of corners from spatial cues.


Turning to FIG. 1, shown in the left box 10 is a shape without corner-enhancing warping. Shown in the center box 20 of FIG. 1 is a corner-enhancing warp function applied to highlight the corners haptically. Shown in the right box 30 of FIG. 1 is a function where further warping has been applied, showing that the effect is tunable depending on the circumstances and the effect desired.


Once the shape warping has been achieved, other techniques for enhancing corners can also be used. Specifically, the curvature dependent control point density and the rotation of the points in time may be altered to produce a desired effect. This shape warping may be applied to sections of 3D geometry to create haptic 3D geometry with distinct corners to increase haptic fidelity. This may also be applied as a process to highlight salient features in shapes for attracting attention.


IV. Creating Pulsing Points

Due to awareness of the de facto limit of control point definition and density, it is possible to create pulsing points that are haptically pleasing. By forcing control points close together, they merge and become a smaller, weaker vibration. By rotating them and bringing them closer and further apart, a localized pulsing sensation can be generated that can haptically give a standby or ready prompt.


Turning to FIG. 2, shown is an illustration of an example series of five control points simultaneously produced in the plane of interaction. The points in the figure have a diameter of a wavelength. The five points spin quickly so they are not distinguishable. In the left panel 40 of FIG. 2, the five points spin and are far enough apart for them to be perceived as a single large haptic point. The central panel 50 shows that as the points orbit closer together the haptic point shrinks and becomes weaker. In the right panel 60, the five control points have merged to become a single control point. The process is then reversed to increase the size and strength of the haptic point and this system is then cycled to generate a pulsing sensation. This results in a point which feels larger and smaller with time to produce a haptically pleasing pulsing effect. As such, FIG. 2 shows a set of points, spinning in a circle with the diameter of the circle growing smaller/bigger over time. (An alternative method to the spinning circle is to move the focus between two locations.)


Turning to FIG. 3, shown is a selection of acoustic field simulations where in the control point is moved through the plane of interaction (shown approximately by the inset black bordered box). The small filled black circles along the bottom edge of each figure represent transducer elements that have been configured to reproduce a control point. In the left panel 70 the control point is created below the plane of interaction, resulting in no focusing in the interaction space. As the focus moves up, the interaction space contains the control point as shown in the central panel 80. Finally, in the right panel 90 the focus has moved up through and out of the interaction space. This process is then reversed and cycled to produce the pulsing sensation. Thus, by moving the control point backwards and forwards through the inset box, a pulsing sensation can be produced throughout the central region. User detection in this scenario can be much more crude, e.g. a light sensor in the central area.


The objective as shown in these figures is to create a “pulsating” sensation. “Pulsating” is defined to be a sensation that grows both stronger/weaker and bigger/smaller over time. (By comparison, a simple modulation only grows stronger/weaker over time.)


Further, FIG. 3 shows one possible example, where the focus is linearly interpolated between two positions, one vertically below the interaction zone and the other vertically above. As the focus moves up and down, the sensation experienced in the interaction zone grows smaller/larger as the ultrasound focus is cone shaped. (in the figure, larger on the left image 70 and right image 90, smaller in the middle image 80). This also has the effect of making the sensation stronger/weaker as the strength drops off moving away from the optimal focus (shown in the middle image 80).


Moving the focus up and down through the interaction zone also has a benefit with the tracking system. Less accuracy is required in the vertical direction. As shown in FIG. 3, if interaction zone is moved up or down, it still experiences a sensation that grew bigger/smaller and stronger/weaker over time. This means that less accuracy in the vertical axis from the tracking system is needed, allowing for the use of a cheaper tracking system.


Alternatively, varying the focusing location can create a pulsing sensation. This has the effect of alternately focusing and defocusing the control point, which generates a lower fidelity pulsing. Although this is less effective, it may be potentially useful for situations in which a pre-baked, offline response that does not need active sensing is required.


V. Combining and Designing Audible and Haptic Feedback

A. Designing the Audible Feedback


As the audible sound is created by the modulation waveform, it is possible to design the sound that is produced. For example, rather than modulating the focused ultrasound with a pure waveform, modulating it with the waveform of a “click” sound will result in an audible “click” sound being produced. Thus, the modulation waveform can be designed and dynamically changed to produce any audible sound.


When using focused ultrasonic carrier waves, the audible sound is produced most intensely at the focus and is directional. To the user, this means the sound appears to originate from the focus. This may be of great use in a haptic system. For example, a mid-air button may be created by focusing the ultrasound onto the user's fingertip. The ultrasound can then be modulated with the waveform of a “click” sound. The user would perceive both a haptic click sensation and an audible “click” sound originating from their finger tip. Thus, both the haptic and audio feedback are created at the same location in mid-air.


B. Separating Audio and Haptic Feedback


The modulation waveform that provides the optimum haptic feedback will often differ from that which provides the optimum audible sound. For example, a modulation waveform that creates a pleasing “click” sound may provide a very weak tactile sensation or a modulation waveform that provides a strong tactile sensation may provide an annoying sound. When designing for a combination of haptic and audio feedback, it is therefore necessary to make trade-offs between the two.


A solution to this is to create multiple points of focus within the acoustic field. Each of the points can be purposed with either creating a haptic effect or creating audible feedback. In the simple button click example, one point can be positioned on the fingertip to create the haptic effect, while another can be positioned elsewhere in the acoustic field to create the audible sound. In this scenario, the audible point would be positioned to avoid contact with the user, and thus would not be able to be felt.


C. Auditory Masking of the Haptic Effect by the Auditory Sound


Auditory masking of a sound occurs when the perception of one sound is affected or covered up by another sound. As the sound from the focused ultrasound is directional, the audible point can be positioned anywhere along the path between the transducers and the user's head or ear where it would then maximize the perceived volume of that sound. By contrast, the audible sound created by the haptic point would be reflected off the finger and away from the user. It would therefore be perceived as quieter. Thus, the audible sound from the haptic point will be masked by the audible sound from the audible point and the user would only be able to hear the audible point.


Haptic and audible points can each have their own separate modulation waveforms. This allows each type of point to be modulated with the optimum waveform for their individually desired effect. Indeed, systems are not limited to having only two simultaneous points. It is possible to have many independent and simultaneous points of both haptic feedback and audible feedback.


VI. Spatio-Temporal Modulation in Haptic Systems

A. Absolute Phase Offset


In order to create smooth transitions between any two complex spaces of transducer activation coefficients they should differ as little as possible. All sets of transducer activation coefficients have one spare degree of freedom: their absolute phase relative to some other activation coefficient pattern. By tying both to some arbitrary gauge point—such as making both as zero phase offset as possible—this reduces to a minimum the frequency shifts in the transducers required to move between the two patterns.


This is illustrated in FIG. 4, which shows an illustrative array of two transducers. The focusing of this array is due to the relative phase offsets in the wave between both transducers, which is described by the angle between them. In the unconstrained example, on the left, the phase at time t=0 100 has to change considerably in order to reach the complex activation coefficients defined for time t=1 110. This induces transient behavior, frequency shifting and power inefficiency when scaled across many transducers. In the constrained example on the right however, the sum of the transducer coefficients has been constrained to the real line at t=0 120 and t=1 130, facilitating a small change in angle to obtain the appropriate relative phase.


Summing the complex-valued transducer activation coefficients of any particular pattern can be used to produce an average. Once computed, the complex conjugate of this average can be taken and made into a unit amplitude complex value. Then by multiplying each transducer activation coefficient with this value, the average phase offset becomes zero. This uses the spare degree of freedom to linearly minimize the changes experienced by each transducer, pushing the differences between the complex phase spaces of the transducer activation coefficients for infinitesimally different patterns towards zero, a key necessity for reducing abrupt changes in the acoustic field and transducer power consumption generally.


B. Spatio-Temporal Modulation of Points, Lines and Shapes


Creating and destroying control points (increasing amplitude from or decreasing amplitude to zero) is associated with noise as the amplitude varies. To maximally reduce noise, non-modulated control points may be created and move around on sets of curve pieces defined parametrically. While non-modulated control points will maximally reduce noise, “less modulated” control points may also reduce noise to a lesser extent (that is modulating the amplitude between 0.5-1 rather than 0-1).


The defined curves will either be closed, where the points will circulate continuously on the curve, or open, where the points will reverse direction. Alternatively, the points may “disappear” upon reaching the end of the curve. When multiple points highlight a single open curve it may be useful for them to swap positions when they become close enough to be perceived as a single point to prevent any perceptual or physical drop in output.


This open or closed path curve, which may be implemented as a three-dimensional spline curve, is the fundamental building block of a system for creating spatio-temporally modulated feedback. Many of these curves running through three-dimensional space may function as contours and be used to create the impression of a shape or surface. A circular path with very small radius may be used to create the impression of a point.


Since this technique requires less focusing time to produce the same response, larger areas may be haptically actuated. For instance, ‘painting’ an area using a control point may be used to create a wider region in space that can be felt to stimulate more receptors in the skin.


Due to the wide area that can be actuated, feedback may be removed from places to create an impression of the negative space. For instance, a circle with a piece missing may be created to represent a haptic fiducial or generate an area of feeling with a conspicuously missing region. By emitting haptics around a space, an area may be highlighted without having to require it to be felt directly, for instance when the area in question must be kept clear of hands or limbs for visibility reasons.


C. Parametric Sound from a Control Point


The haptic sensation from the control point is generated through the action of the spatio-temporal strobe effect. Since the source of the haptic effect is distinct and different from amplitude modulation, amplitude modulation may be used with non-haptic audible content while also creating high-quality haptic sensation at the same time in the same point, line or shape.


The ultimate goal of the technology is to produce a silent operation. Audible output is correlated with temporal changes in the acoustic field, which must therefore be as smooth and reduced as possible. To create this effect, it is possible to move the control points of the ultrasonic focused patterns around smoothly using high speed updates (preferably greater than 2 kHz) to produce sensations at target points, lines and shapes rather than creating them unchanging in time with much higher intensity ultrasonic devices or manipulating their amplitude in time.


Modulating in this manner may use much lower strobing frequencies than would be expected by simply considering mechanoreceptors or the density of focused power in time. Therefore, combining both spatio-temporal and amplitude modulation of control points at once can also be used produce stronger haptic feedback. Different rhythms of control point motion may also be used to provide different textures, and thus the amplitude modulation can provide texture to the spatio-temporally modulated control points or vice versa.


VII. Frequency Control Using Self-Intersecting Curves

Creating a point and moving it without modulating in amplitude may haptically actuate a path in the air. By making the point follow a path repeatedly at a given speed and a constant frequency, a haptic effect may be generated on the path in the air. Making the path longer increases the path distance and thus the speed needed for the point to achieve a given frequency. Consequently, this reduces the power density available for creating feedback. Multiple points may haptically actuate a path to create a more even distribution around the path at a given frequency. But this reduces the power that can be brought to bear at these points. A further significant limitation is that the path must be closed or audible sound will result due to the discontinuities involved in open paths, such as for instance, a distinct point or line segment.


One way to overcome these issues is to slow or accelerate the points as they move along a curve. However, when used with spatio-temporal modulation this has limitations both in that the frequency cannot be different for different points along the path, and that if the point slows too greatly it becomes less perceptible as it moves out of the range of frequencies perceptible haptically. Conversely, if the point moves too quickly along its path, it can create further air disturbances and thus audible noise.


Instead of simply changing the speed of the points, an increase in the amount of power at given points on the path can be realized through the construction of a self-intersecting curve that crosses over itself one or more times in space. In the local neighborhood of the intersection points, harmonics of the base path frequency can be expressed. This change in the frequency behavior also increases the power at the crossing point, enabling a rich palette of behaviors to be realized in the crossing region that are in contrast to other locations along the path. This intersection may also be engineered to make only the intersection within the detectable frequency range of human touch, or only the intersection outside the frequency range and thus haptically undetectable. It also enables both the specific and broad targeting of different mechanoreceptors in the skin. In many scenarios, the absence of haptic feedback in an area surrounded by haptic feedback may be felt more strongly than the feedback itself.


Multiple paths that intersect one or more times may also be created; this will produce a pattern of haptic cadence that embodies a particular rhythm or texture. This does not necessarily mean that the path or paths should be repeatable or the crossing point of the curve at the same position each time. In some cases, due to the movement of the individually-considered points being too fast or weak to feel, it can be engineered such that the crossing point or points are haptically highlighted due to the self-intersection. In each case, these multiple crossing or self-intersecting curves may contain either or both point regions and path segments wherein the curves occupy the same space.


The points moving along the curves defined at a precise location have a real physical size. The abstract notion of “curves” does not reflect the size of the points, so in many cases the abstract curves do not have to intersect, but instead the area of effect of the point merely has to be overlapping to realize an increase in average power and frequency. Due to this, a set of paths or self-intersecting curves can potentially lead to unanticipated haptic results. Therefore, the produced haptic patterns may be best visualized using a frequency/occupancy graph and such a frequency/occupancy graph can be transformed to and from a representative haptic curve.


VIII. Conclusion

The various features of the foregoing embodiments may be selected and combined to produce numerous variations of improved haptic-based systems.


In the foregoing specification, specific embodiments have been described. However, one of ordinary skill in the art appreciates that various modifications and changes can be made without departing from the scope of the invention as set forth in the claims below. Accordingly, the specification and figures are to be regarded in an illustrative rather than a restrictive sense, and all such modifications are intended to be included within the scope of present teachings.


The benefits, advantages, solutions to problems, and any element(s) that may cause any benefit, advantage, or solution to occur or become more pronounced are not to be construed as a critical, required, or essential features or elements of any or all the claims. The invention is defined solely by the appended claims including any amendments made during the pendency of this application and all equivalents of those claims as issued.


Moreover in this document, relational terms such as first and second, top and bottom, and the like may be used solely to distinguish one entity or action from another entity or action without necessarily requiring or implying any actual such relationship or order between such entities or actions. The terms “comprises,” “comprising,” “has”, “having,” “includes”, “including,” “contains”, “containing” or any other variation thereof, are intended to cover a non-exclusive inclusion, such that a process, method, article, or apparatus that comprises, has, includes, contains a list of elements does not include only those elements but may include other elements not expressly listed or inherent to such process, method, article, or apparatus. An element proceeded by “comprises . . . a”. “has . . . a”, “includes . . . a”, “contains . . . a” does not, without more constraints, preclude the existence of additional identical elements in the process, method, article, or apparatus that comprises, has, includes, contains the element. The terms “a” and “an” are defined as one or more unless explicitly stated otherwise herein. The terms “substantially”, “essentially”, “approximately”, “about” or any other version thereof, are defined as being close to as understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. The term “coupled” as used herein is defined as connected, although not necessarily directly and not necessarily mechanically. A device or structure that is “configured” in a certain way is configured in at least that way, but may also be configured in ways that are not listed.


The Abstract of the Disclosure is provided to allow the reader to quickly ascertain the nature of the technical disclosure. It is submitted with the understanding that it will not be used to interpret or limit the scope or meaning of the claims. In addition, in the foregoing Detailed Description, it can be seen that various features are grouped together in various embodiments for the purpose of streamlining the disclosure. This method of disclosure is not to be interpreted as reflecting an intention that the claimed embodiments require more features than are expressly recited in each claim. Rather, as the following claims reflect, inventive subject matter lies in less than all features of a single disclosed embodiment. Thus the following claims are hereby incorporated into the Detailed Description, with each claim standing on its own as a separately claimed subject matter.

Claims
  • 1. A method comprising: i) producing an acoustic field from a transducer array having known relative positions and orientations; ii) defining a plurality of control points wherein each of the plurality of control points has a known spatial relationship relative to the transducer array; iii) engaging in rhythms of motion of at least one of the control points that correlated with temporal changes in the acoustic field to produce a desired audible sound.
  • 2. The method as in claim 1, wherein the acoustic field is produced by a mid-air haptic feedback system.
  • 3. The method as in claim 1, wherein the desired audible sound is perceived to be originating from the at least one of the plurality of control points.
  • 4. The method as in claim 1, further comprising modulating the acoustic field associated with at least one of the plurality of control points to produce localized haptic feedback in the same general location as the desired audible sound.
  • 5. The method as in claim 4, wherein the localized haptic feedback is separated from the desired audible sound wave so that the desired audible sound produces perceivable haptic feedback below a preset threshold.
  • 6. The method as in claim 4, wherein the desired audible sound is perceived by a user to be louder than the audible sound produced by the localized haptic feedback.
  • 7. A method comprising: i) producing an acoustic field from a transducer array having known relative positions and orientations; ii) defining a plurality of control points wherein each of the plurality of control points has a known spatial relationship relative to the transducer array; iii) modulating a position of at least one of the plurality of control points to produce a desired audible sound; and v) creating a plurality of points of focus within the acoustic field, wherein a haptic effect is at a first point of focus and a desired audible sound is at the second point of focus; vi) creating a pulsing sensation by manipulating location of the plurality of control points so that the pulsation sensation grows both stronger/weaker and bigger/smaller over time.
  • 8. The method as in claim 7, wherein the acoustic field is produced by a mid-air haptic feedback system.
  • 9. The method as in claim 7, wherein the first point of focus is in a different location than the second point of focus.
  • 10. The method as in claim 7, wherein the desired audible sound is perceived to be originating from the at least one of the plurality of control points.
  • 11. The method as in claim 7, further comprising modulating the acoustic field associated with at least one of the plurality of control points to produce localized haptic feedback in the same general location as the desired audible sound.
  • 12. The method as in claim 11, wherein the localized haptic feedback is separated from the desired audible sound wave so that the desired audible sound produces perceivable haptic feedback below a preset threshold.
  • 13. The method as in claim 11, wherein the desired audible sound is perceived by a user to be louder than the audible sound produced by the localized haptic feedback.
  • 14. The method as in claim 11, wherein the desired audible sound is perceived by a user primarily from the first point of focus.
  • 15. The method as in claim 11, wherein the desired audible sound is perceived by a user primarily from the second point of focus.
RELATED APPLICATION

This application claims the benefit of the following four U.S. Provisional Patent Applications, all of which are incorporated by reference in their entirety: 1. Ser. No. 62/118,560, filed on Feb. 20, 2015. 2. Ser. No. 62/193,234, filed on Jul. 16, 2015. 3. Ser. No. 62/206,393, filed on Aug. 18, 2015. 4. Ser. No. 62/275,216, filed on Jan. 5, 2016.

US Referenced Citations (303)
Number Name Date Kind
4218921 Berge Aug 1980 A
4771205 Mequio Sep 1988 A
4881212 Takeuchi Nov 1989 A
5226000 Moses Jul 1993 A
5243344 Koulopoulos Sep 1993 A
5329682 Thurn Jul 1994 A
5422431 Ichiki Jun 1995 A
5426388 Flora Jun 1995 A
5477736 Lorraine Dec 1995 A
5511296 Dias Apr 1996 A
5859915 Norris Jan 1999 A
6029518 Oeftering Feb 2000 A
6193936 Gardner Feb 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
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
8369973 Risbo Feb 2013 B2
8607922 Werner Dec 2013 B1
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
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
10523159 Megretski Dec 2019 B2
10531212 Long Jan 2020 B2
10569300 Hoshi Feb 2020 B2
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
11169610 Sarafianou Nov 2021 B2
11189140 Long Nov 2021 B2
11204644 Long Dec 2021 B2
11276281 Carter Mar 2022 B2
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
20050212760 Marvit Sep 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
20070263741 Erving Nov 2007 A1
20080012647 Risbo Jan 2008 A1
20080084789 Altman Apr 2008 A1
20080130906 Goldstein 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
20140211593 Tyler Jul 2014 A1
20140265572 Siedenburg Sep 2014 A1
20140269207 Baym Sep 2014 A1
20140269208 Baym Sep 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
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
20150189455 Donaldson Jul 2015 A1
20150189457 Donaldson Jul 2015 A1
20150192995 Subramanian Jul 2015 A1
20150220199 Wang Aug 2015 A1
20150226537 Schorre Aug 2015 A1
20150226831 Nakamura 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
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
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
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 Kappus Apr 2021 A1
20210141458 Sarafianou May 2021 A1
20210165491 Sun Jun 2021 A1
20210170447 Buckland 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
20220083142 Brown Mar 2022 A1
20220095068 Kappus Mar 2022 A1
20220113806 Long Apr 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
Foreign Referenced Citations (57)
Number Date Country
2470115 Jun 2003 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
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
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
2015035657 Feb 2015 JP
2016035646 Mar 2016 JP
20120065779 Jun 2012 KR
20130055972 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
2014181084 Nov 2014 WO
2015006467 Jan 2015 WO
2015039622 Mar 2015 WO
2015127335 Aug 2015 WO
2016007920 Jan 2016 WO
2016095033 Jun 2016 WO
2016099279 Jun 2016 WO
2016132144 Aug 2016 WO
2016137675 Sep 2016 WO
2016162058 Oct 2016 WO
2017172006 Oct 2017 WO
2020049321 Mar 2020 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (295)
Entry
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.
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.
Amanda Zimmerman, The gentle touch receptors of mammalian skin, Science, Nov. 21, 2014, vol. 346 Issue 6212, p. 950.
Corrected Notice of Allowability dated Aug. 9, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/396,851 (pp. 1-6).
Henrik Bruus, Acoustofluidics 2: Perturbation theory and ultrasound resonance modes, Lab Chip, 2012, 12, 20-28.
Hyunjae Gil, Whiskers: Exploring the Use of Ultrasonic Haptic Cues on the Face, CHI 2018, Apr. 21-26, 2018, Montréal, QC, Canada.
India Morrison, The skin as a social organ, Exp Brain Res (2010) 204:305-314.
JonasChatel-Goldman, Touch increases autonomic coupling between romantic partners, Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience Mar. 2014, vol. 8, Article 95.
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 airstream, Applied Physics Letters 111, 064104 (2017).
Keisuke Hasegawa, Midair Ultrasound Fragrance Rendering, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, vol. 24, No. 4, Apr. 2018 1477.
Keisuke Hasegawa,,Curved acceleration path of ultrasound-driven airflow, J. Appl. Phys. 125, 054902 (2019).
Line S Loken, Coding of pleasant touch by unmyelinated afferents in humans, Nature Neuroscience vol. 12 [ No. 5 [ May 2009 547.
Mariana von Mohr, The soothing function of touch: affective touch reduces feelings of social exclusion, Scientific Reports, 7: 13516, Oct. 18, 2017.
Mitsuru Nakajima, Remotely Displaying Cooling Sensation via Ultrasound-Driven Air Flow, Haptics Symposium 2018, San Francisco, USA p. 340.
Mohamed Yacine Tsalamlal, Affective Communication through Air Jet Stimulation: Evidence from Event-Related Potentials, International Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 2018.
Notice of Allowance dated Jul. 22, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/600,500 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action dated Aug. 10, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/564,016 (pp. 1-14).
Office Action dated Aug. 19, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/170,841 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action dated Aug. 9, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/068,825 (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).
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.
Ryoko Takahashi, Tactile Stimulation by Repetitive Lateral Movement of Midair Ultrasound Focus, Journal of Latex Class Files, vol. 14, No. 8, Aug. 2015.
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.
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).
Takaaki Kamigaki, Noncontact Thermal and Vibrotactile Display Using Focused Airborne Ultrasound, EuroHaptics 2020, LNCS 12272, pp. 271-278, 2020.
Tomoo Kamakura, Acoustic streaming induced in focused Gaussian beams, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97(5), Pt. 1, May 1995 p. 2740.
Uta Sailer, How Sensory and Affective Attributes Describe Touch Targeting C-Tactile Fibers, Experimental Psychology (2020), 67(4), 224-236.
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.
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).
ISR & WO for PCT/GB2020/052545 (Jan. 27, 2021) 14 pages.
ISR for PCT/GB2020/052546 (Feb. 23, 2021) (14 pages).
ISR for PCT/GB2020/053373 (Mar. 26, 2021) (16 pages).
Notice of Allowance dated Apr. 20, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/563,608 (pp. 1-5).
Notice of Allowance dated Jun. 10, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/092,333 (pp. 1-9).
Notice of Allowance dated Jun. 25, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/396,851 (pp. 1-10).
Office Action dated Jun. 25, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/899,720 (pp. 1-5).
Office Action dated Mar. 31, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,760 (pp. 1-21).
Office Action dated May 13, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/600,500 (pp. 1-9).
Office Action dated May 14, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (pp. 1-6).
Communication Pursuant to Article 94(3) EPC for EP 19723179.8 (dated Feb. 15, 2022), 10 pages.
EPO ISR and WO for PCT/GB2022/050204 (Apr. 7, 2022) (15 pages).
https://radiopaedia.org/articles/physical-principles-of-ultrasound-1?lang=gb (Accessed May 29, 2022).
IN 202047026493 Office Action dated Mar. 8, 2022, 6 pages.
ISR & WO For PCT/GB2021/052946, 15 pages.
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. 4, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/404,660 (pp. 1-5).
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).
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).
EPO Communication for Application 18 811 906.9 (dated Nov. 29, 2021) (15 pages).
EPO Examination Report 17 748 4656.4 (dated Jan. 12, 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).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2020/052829 (Feb. 10, 2021) (15 pages).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2021/052415 (Dec. 22, 2021) (16 pages).
Mohamed Yacine Tsalamlal, Non-Intrusive Haptic Interfaces: State-of-the Art Survey, HAID 2013, LNCS 7989, pp. 1-9, 2013.
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Jan. 21, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 17/068,834 (pp. 1-12).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated Jan. 24, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,767 (pp. 1-22).
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 (Notice of Allowance and Fees Due (PTOL-85)) dated Feb. 11, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,760 (pp. 1-8).
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).
Azad et al., Deep domain adaptation under deep label scarcity. arXiv preprint arXiv:1809.08097 (2018) (Year: 2018).
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).
Der et al., Inverse kinematics for reduced deformable models. ACM Transactions on graphics (TOG) 25, No. 3 (2006): 1174-1179. (Year: 2006).
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).
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).
Duka, “Neural network based inverse kinematics solution for trajectory tracking of a robotic arm.” Procedia Technology 12 (2014) 20-27. (Year: 2014).
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).
Oikonomidis et al., “Efficient model-based 3D tracking of hand articulations using Kinect.” In BmVC, vol. 1, No. 2, p. 3. 2011. (Year: 2011).
Office Action (Non-Final Rejection) dated May 25, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/843,281 (pp. 1-28).
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.
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).
DeSilets, C. S. (1978). Transducer arrays suitable for acoustic imaging (No. GL-2833). Stanford Univ CA Edward L Ginzton Lab of Physics.
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).
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.
Henneberg, J., Geriach, 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.
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.
Beranek, L., & Mellow, T. (2019). Acoustics: Sound Fields, Transducers and Vibration. Academic Press.
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).
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).
“Welcome to Project Soli” video, https://atap.google.eom/#project-soli Accessed Nov. 30, 2018, 2 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).
Alexander, J. et al. (2011), Adding Haptic Feedback to Mobile TV (6 pages).
Aoki et al., Sound location of stero reproduction with parametric loudspeakers, Applied Acoustics 73 (2012) 1289-1295 (7 pages).
Ashish Shrivastava et al., Learning from Simulated and Unsupervised Images through Adversarial Training, Jul. 19, 2017, pp. 1-16.
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).
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.
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.
Canada Application 2,909,804 Office Action dated Oct. 18, 2019, 4 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.
Christoper M. Bishop, Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning, 2006, pp. 1-758.
Colgan, A., “How Does the Leap Motion Controller Work?” Leap Motion, Aug. 9, 2014, 10 pages.
Corrected Notice of Allowability dated Jan. 14, 2021 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/897,804 (pp. 1-2).
Corrected Notice of Allowability dated Jun. 21, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,213 (2 pages).
Corrected Notice of Allowability dated Oct. 31, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/623,516 (pp. 1-2).
Damn Geeky, “Virtual projection keyboard technology with haptic feedback on palm of your hand,” May 30, 2013, 4 pages.
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.
Definition of “lnterferometry” 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.
Diederik P. Kingma et al., Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization, Jan. 30, 2017, pp. 1-15.
E. Bok, Metasurface for Water-to-Air Sound Transmission, Physical Review Letters 120, 044302 (2018) (6 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.
EPO Office Action for EP16708440.9 dated Sep. 12, 2018 (7 pages).
EPSRC Grant summary EP/J004448/1 (dated 2011) (1 page).
Eric Tzeng et al., Adversarial Discriminative Domain Adaptation, Feb. 17, 2017, pp. 1-10.
European Office Action for Application No. EP16750992.6, dated Oct. 2, 2019, 3 pages.
Ex Parte Quayle Action dated Dec. 28, 2018 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,213 (pp. 1-7).
Extended European Search Report for Application No. EP19169929.7, dated Aug. 6, 2019, 7 pages.
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).
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.
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.
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).
GitHub—danfis/libccd: Library for collision detection between two convex shapes, Mar. 26, 2020, pp. 1-6.
GitHub—IntelRealSense/hand_tracking_samples: researc codebase for depth-based hand pose estimation using dynamics based tracking and CNNs, Mar. 26, 2020, 3 pages.
Gokturk, et al., “ATime-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.
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).
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.
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.
Hoshi, T., Development of Aerial-Input and Aerial-Tactile-Feedback System, IEEE World Haptics Conference 2011, p. 569-573.
Hoshi, T., Handwriting Transmission System Using Noncontact Tactile Display, IEEE Haptics Symposium 2012 pp. 399-401.
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).
Hoshi, T., Touchable Holography, SIGGRAPH 2009, New Orleans, Louisiana, Aug. 3-7, 2009. (1 page).
Hua J, Qin H., Haptics-based dynamic implicit solid modeling, IEEE Trans Vis Comput Graph. Sep.-Oct. 2004;10(5):574-86.
Iddan, et al., “3D Imaging in the Studio (And Elsewhwere . . . ” Apr. 2001, 3DV systems Ltd., Yokneam, Isreal, www.3dvsystems.com.il, 9 pages.
Imaginary Phone: Learning Imaginary Interfaces by Transferring Spatial Memory From a Familiar Device Sean Gustafson, Christian Holz and Patrick Baudisch. UIST 2011. (10pages).
International Preliminary Report on Patentability and Written Opinion issued in corresponding PCT/US2017/035009, dated Dec. 4, 2018, 8 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/GB2018/053738, dated Apr. 11, 2019, 14 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/GB2018/053739, dated Jun. 4, 2019, 16 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/GB2019/050969, dated Jun. 13, 2019, 15 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/GB2019/051223, dated Aug. 8, 2019, 15 pages.
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/GB2019/052510, dated Jan. 14, 2020, 25 pages.
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2020/050013 (Jul. 13, 2020) (20 pages).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2020/050926 (Jun. 2, 2020) (16 pages).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2020/052544 (Dec. 18, 2020) (14 pages).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2020/052545 (Jan. 27, 2021) (14 pages).
ISR and WO for PCT/GB2020/052829 (Feb. 1, 2021) (15 pages).
Iwamoto et al. (2008), Non-contact Method for Producing Tactile Sensation Using Airborne Ultrasound, EuroHaptics, pp. 504-513.
Iwamoto et al., Airborne Ultrasound Tactile Display: Supplement, The University of Tokyo 2008 (2 pages).
Iwamoto T et al, “Two-dimensional Scanning Tactile Display using Ultrasound Radiation Pressure”, Haptic Interfaces for Virtual Environment and Teleoperator Systems, 20 06 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.
Jager et al., “Air-Coupled 40-KHZ Ultrasonic 2D-Phased Array Based on a 3D-Printed Waveguide Structure”, 2017 IEEE, 4 pages.
Japanese Office Action (with English language translation) for Application No. 2017-514569, dated Mar. 31, 3019, 10 pages.
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.
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.
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.
K. Jia, Dynamic properties of micro-particles in ultrasonic transportation using phase-controlled standing waves, J. Applied Physics 116, n. 16 (2014) (12 pages).
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.
Kamakura, T. and Aoki, K. (2006) “A Highly Directional Audio System using a Parametric Array in Air” WESPAC IX 2006 (8 pages).
Kolb, et al., “Time-of-Flight Cameras in Computer Graphics,” Computer Graphics forum, vol. 29 (2010), No. 1, pp. 141-159.
Konstantinos Bousmalis et al., Domain Separation Networks, 29th Conference on Neural Information Processing Sysgtems (NIPS 2016), Barcelona, Spain. Aug. 22, 2016, pp. 1-15.
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.
Large et al.,Feel the noise: Mid-air ultrasound haptics as a novel human-vehicle interaction paradigm, Applied Ergonomics (2019) (10 pages).
Li, Larry, “Time-of-Flight Camera—An Introduction,” Texas Instruments, Technical White Paper, SLOA190B—Jan. 2014 Revised May 2014, 10 pages.
Light, E.D., Progress in Two Dimensional Arrays for Real Time Volumetric Imaging, 1998 (17 pages).
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).
Mahdi Rad et al., Feature Mapping for Learning Fast and Accurate 3D Pose Inference from Synthetic Images, Mar. 26, 2018, pp. 1-14.
Marco A B Andrade et al, “Matrix method for acoustic levitation simulation”, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectricsand Frequency Control, IEEE, US, (Aug. 1, 2011), vol. 58, No. 8, ISSN 0885-3010, pp. 1674-1683.
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.
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.
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).
Marzo et al., Holographic acoustic elements for manipulation of levitated objects, Nature Communications DOI: I0.1038/ncomms9661 (2015) (7 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.
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.
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).
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.
Notice of Allowance dated Apr. 22, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/671,107 (pp. 1-5).
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. 10, 2020, for U.S. Appl. No. 16/160,862 (pp. 1-9).
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 Jun. 17, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/210,661 (pp. 1-9).
Notice of Allowance dated May 30, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/966,213 (pp. 1-9).
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).
Notice of Allowance in U.S. Appl. No. 15/210,661 dated Jun. 17, 2020 (22 pages).
Obrist et al., Emotions Mediated Through Mid-Air Haptics, CHI 2015, Apr. 18-23, 2015, Seoul, Republic of Korea. (10 pages).
Obrist et al., Talking about Tactile Experiences, CHI 2013, Apr. 27-May 2, 2013 (10 pages).
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).
Office Action dated Apr. 17, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/401,148 (pp. 1-15).
Office Action dated Apr. 18, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/296,127 (pags 1-6).
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).
Office Action dated Apr. 4, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/897,804 (pp. 1-10).
Office Action dated Aug. 22, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/160,862 (pp. 1-5).
Office Action dated Dec. 11, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/959,266 (pp. 1-15).
Office Action dated Dec. 7, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/563,608 (pp. 1-8).
Office Action dated Feb. 20, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/623,516 (pp. 1-8).
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. 10, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/228,767 (pp. 1-6).
Office Action dated Jan. 29, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/198,959 (p. 1-6).
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 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 Mar. 20, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/210,661 (pp. 1-10).
Office Action dated May 16, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/396,851 (pp. 1-7).
Office Action dated May 18, 2020 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/960,113 (pp. 1-21).
Office Action dated Oct. 17, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/897,804 (pp. 1-10).
Office Action dated Oct. 31, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/671,107 (pp. 1-6).
Office Action dated Oct. 7, 2019 for U.S. Appl. No. 15/396,851 (pp. 1-9).
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).
OGRECave/ogre—GitHub: ogre/Samples/Media/materials at 7de80a7483f20b50f2b10d7ac6de9d9c6c87d364, Mar. 26, 2020, 1 page.
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; 25 pages.
Oscar Martínez-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.
Partial International Search Report for Application No. PCT/GB2018/053735, dated Apr. 12, 2019, 14 pages.
Partial ISR for Application No. PCT/GB2020/050013 dated May 19, 2020 (16 pages).
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.
Phys.org, Touchable Hologram Becomes Reality, Aug. 6, 2009, by Lisa Zyga (2 pages).
Pompei, F.J. (2002), “Sound from Ultrasound: The Parametric Array as an Audible Sound Source”, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (132 pages).
Rocchesso et al., Accessing and Selecting Menu Items by In-Air Touch, ACM CHItaly'19, Sep. 23-25, 2019, Padova, Italy (9 pages).
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.
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.
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).
Search Report by EPO for EP 17748466 dated Jan. 13, 2021 (16 pages).
Search Report for GB1308274.8 dated Nov. 11, 2013. (2 pages).
Search Report for GB1415923.0 dated Mar. 11, 2015. (1 page).
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).
Search report for PCT/GB2014/051319 dated Dec. 8, 2014 (4 pages).
Search report for PCT/GB2015/052507 dated Mar. 11, 2020 (19 pages).
Search report for PCT/GB2015/052578 dated Oct. 26, 2015 (12 pages).
Search report for PCT/GB2015/052916 dated Feb. 26, 2020 (18 pages).
Search Report for PCT/GB2017/052332 dated Oct. 10, 2017 (12 pages).
Search report for PCT/GB2018/051061 dated Sep. 26, 2018 (17 pages).
Search report for PCT/US2018/028966 dated Jul. 13, 2018 (43 pages).
Sergey Ioffe et al., Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariat Shift, Mar. 2, 2015, pp. 1-11.
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).
Shanxin Yuan et al., BigHand2.2M Bechmark: Hand Pose Dataset and State of the Art Analysis, Dec. 9, 2017, pp. 1-9.
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.
Sixth Sense webpage, http://www.pranavmistry.com/projects/sixthsense/ Accessed Nov. 30, 2018, 7 pages.
Stan Melax et al., Dynamics Based 3D Skeletal Hand Tracking, May 22, 2017, pp. 1-8.
Steve Guest et al., “Audiotactile interactions in roughness perception”, Exp. Brain Res (2002) 146:161-171, DOI 10.1007/S00221-002-1164-z, Accepted: May 16, 2002/Published online: Jul. 26, 2002, Springer-Verlag 2002, (11 pages).
Sylvia Gebhardt, Ultrasonic Transducer Arrays for Particle Manipulation (date unknown) (2 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.
Takahashi, M. et al., Large Aperture Airborne Ultrasound Tactile Display Using Distributed Array Units, SICE Annual Conference 2010 p. 359-62.
Takayuki et al., “Noncontact Tactile Display Based on Radiation Pressure of Airborne Ultrasound” IEEE Transactions on Haptics vol. 3, No. 3, p. 165 (2010).
Teixeira, et al., “A brief introduction to Microsoft's Kinect Sensor,” Kinect, 26 pages, retrieved Nov. 2018.
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.
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.
Tom Nelligan and Dan Kass, Intro to Ultrasonic Phased Array (date unknown) (8 pages).
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.
Wang et al., Device-Free Gesture Tracking Using Acoustic Signals, ACM MobiCom '16, pp. 82-94 (13 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).
Wooh et al., “Optimum beam steering of linear phased arays,” Wave Motion 29 (1999) pp. 245-265, 21 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.
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).
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.
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.
Yaroslav Ganin et al., Domain-Adversarial Training of Neural Networks, Journal of Machine Learning Research 17 (2016) 1-35, submitted May 2015; published Apr. 2016.
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.
Yoshino, K. and Shinoda, H. (2013), “Visio Acoustic Screen for Contactless Touch Interface with Tactile Sensation”, University of Tokyo (5 pages).
Zeng, Wejun, “Microsoft Kinect Sensor and Its Effect,” IEEE Multimedia, Apr.-Jun. 2012, 7 pages.
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. 12, 2022 for U.S. Appl. No. 16/734,479 (pp. 1-7).
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20210183215 A1 Jun 2021 US
Provisional Applications (4)
Number Date Country
62275216 Jan 2016 US
62206393 Aug 2015 US
62193234 Jul 2015 US
62118560 Feb 2015 US
Continuations (3)
Number Date Country
Parent 16159695 Oct 2018 US
Child 17176899 US
Parent 15821292 Nov 2017 US
Child 16159695 US
Parent 15047757 Feb 2016 US
Child 15821292 US