Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243

www.elsevier.com/locate/robot

Biomimetic whiskers for shape recognition

DaeEun Kim a,∗ , Ralf Möller b
a Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain Sciences, Amalienstr. 33, Munich, D-80799, Germany
b Computer Engineering Group, Faculty of Technology, Bielefeld University, D-33501 Bielefeld, Germany

Received 20 July 2005; received in revised form 27 July 2006; accepted 4 August 2006
Available online 18 September 2006

Abstract

Rodents demonstrate an outstanding capability of tactile perception with their whiskers. Mechanoreceptors surrounding the whisker shaft
in their follicle structure measure deflection of the whisker. We designed biomimetic whiskers following the basic design of the follicle. In
experiments with the artificial whiskers, we have explored tactile perception based on active whisking where the deflection angle or velocity
provides the localization information which is the basis of shape recognition. Measuring contact distances at varying protraction angles allows
discrimination of round objects with a varying curvature, or objects with different lateral shapes, such as square and round objects. We show the
capabilities and limitations of a single whisker for shape recognition as well as the usefulness of multiple whiskers. In addition, measuring both
vertical and horizontal deflection of a single whisker allows detection of the vertical shape for objects with a smooth surface. Two or more whiskers
stacked vertically can recognize the vertical shape by observing the difference of their deflection amplitudes or the time shift of deflection velocity
peak. The results provide a clue on how autonomous robots could improve their sensory capabilities with mechanical probes.
c 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Biomimetic whisker; Biorobotics; Tactile sensors; Shape recognition; Active perception

1. Introduction detection [27]. To obtain localization information of an object,

Recognizing shapes of objects with only a mechanical probe
is a challenging problem. There have been several methods to
use mechanical probes or antenna to recognize objects in the
robotics field. The engineering approaches evaluate deflection
with vision, torque sensors, strain gages, or potentiometers [13,
25,27,21]. The angle sweeped by an actuator was observed at
the base of a mechanical probe and the contact distance was
determined from the torque or force measurement. Russell [21]
designed a tactile sensor array, each sensor consisting of a
potentiometer and a long inflexible beam, and the potentiometer
sensor at the whisker root measured the rotational angle
proportional to the contact force applied to the antenna tip.
The tactile system thus obtained the surface profile of an
object. Alternatively, a flexible beam can be used as a probe.
Such an antenna probe system, including a piano wire, a
sweeping actuator and strain gages, has been tested for object
∗ Corresponding address: University of Leicester, Leicester, LE1 7RH, UK.
Fax: +44 116 252 3330.
E-mail address: daeeun.kim@le.ac.uk (D. Kim).
the contact point on objects can be determined by observing the
fundamental resonant frequency of the vibration at the contact
moment [26]. A combination of distance information based on
force/moment sensors and a variety of force directions by an
active antenna was used to extract the shape information of an
object [25]. Kaneko et al. [14] presented a geometrical analysis
for the relation between a probe and the curved shape of
objects. They developed an active antenna system to determine
the contact location as well as detect the slip of the antenna
depending on the force direction. Their active antenna system
consists of a flexible beam, actuators to move the beam, a torque
sensor and angular position sensors to measure the rotational
angle of the beam [14].
Recently a biomimetic whisker system, consisting of
a capacitor microphone and a real rat whisker has been
studied [18,8,7], and it was shown that it can be a useful
tool to discriminate textures of target objects. Later Bovet
and Pfeifer [4] proposed a robot control architecture which
learns cross-modal correlations between visual, tactile or motor
modalities. Seth et al. [22] developed artificial whiskers to
provide signals proportional to the bending magnitude. Their

c 2006 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

0921-8890/$ - see front matter

doi:10.1016/j.robot.2006.08.001
230 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243
Fig. 1. Mouse whiskers (photo: Wolfram Schenck).
whiskers consist of polyamid strips with 20 resistive areas
embedded regularly along the longitudinal length, and the
resistance of each whisker changes depending on the amount of
bend. As a result, the whiskers can measure bending in only one
direction. Our earlier work reported that a biomimetic whisker
with steel shaft and magnetic sensors can measure the vibration
of the whisker beam as well as the deflection angle [16]. We
have explored tactile perception based on active whisking, and
found the deflection amplitude or velocity provides localization
information of a target object. Here, we will show that based on
this localization approach, a collection of contact distances at
varying protraction angles can provide shape information.
Real rodents demonstrate an outstanding capability of shape
recognition and texture discrimination with their whiskers [6,5,
3]. Rodents have tactile whisker arrays in the face as shown in
Fig. 1 and they can process spatial information with laterally
oriented vibrissae through active whisking. Our work on
shape recognition is motivated by their whisking function and
sensory abilities. In the biological whisker system, the whisker
shaft is embedded in a follicle structure. Mechanoreceptors
surrounding the shaft measure deflection in all directions,
some of them with tonic, others with phasic response [17,20,
24,23,10]. Our artificial whisker system imitates this design
in a very simplified way. In all our designs, the whisker is
surrounded by sensors, and whisker deflection either affects
these sensors without contact (magnetic sensors affected by
magnets on the whisker shaft) or with contact (piezoelectric
sensors). Previously we reported that the artificial whiskers
can detect the deflection angle and the deflection direction
for both low frequencies (including static deflection) and high
frequencies (texture-related signals) [16]. Here, we will use
low-frequency signals for shape recognition.
In this paper, we suggest a novel method to recognize
the shape of target objects based on deflection angles. The
deflection amplitude or velocity signal directly provides the
localization information, the distance and angular position of
an object. Based on the localization approach, we describe
several possibilities to detect the shape of a target object with a
single whisker or multiple whiskers. We start with a theoretical
analysis of deflection amplitude for our artificial whisker. Then
we present the experimental results with single and multiple
whiskers to discriminate various shapes of objects.
2. Method
We mounted two arrays of whiskers on a Koala platform
(K-team) — see Fig. 2(a). For active whisking, each array is
mounted on a plate which can be rotated around a vertical
axis by a DC motor. Both rotation angle and sweeping speed
can be controlled, and its maximum rotation angle is about
120◦ . Whisker sensors can be mounted in arbitrary position
and orientation on the plate. All whiskers on the plate share the
same angular movement. Since the whiskers are moved by the
same DC motor, their protraction and retraction movements are
synchronous. The sensor signals are amplified and transmitted
into the on-board computer (PC104+) mounted on the robot,
via a multi-channel data acquisition board (PCM-9112+).
In each individual whisker, the whisker shaft is a steel beam
with diameter 0.5 mm and is clamped at the aluminium base.
Here we use artificial whiskers based on hall-effect sensors.
The hall-effect magnetic sensors can measure the difference
of magnetic flux at two sensors on opposite sides caused by
the movement of the whisker to which a permanent magnet
is attached. Directional sensitivity was achieved by using
two pairs of sensors arranged orthogonally to each other. To
test shape recognition, we can build several types of objects
consisting of circular or square discs (10 mm height for each
disc) — see Fig. 2(b).
2.1. Theoretical estimation of deflection
We will first provide the theoretical model of deflection
of our artificial whiskers and show how the deflection signal
during active whisking is influenced by the shape of target
objects. In an active antenna system, if the torque τ and the
angular displacement θ at the antenna base are given, the
distance can be easily estimated by the equation 3E I θ/τ [15,
14]. E is the Young’s modulus of elasticity and I is the
cross-sectional area momentum of inertia. Thus, the distance
estimation with torque measurement depends on the material
and thickness of the whisker shaft. In fact, rodents have slowly
adapting and rapidly adapting mechanoreceptors around the
whisker shaft in the follicle, and there has been physiological
evidence that the deflection amplitude and velocity signals
are coded at ganglion cells [23,24]. In this paper, we will
focus on measuring the deflection amplitude and velocity, and
investigate how they can serve to extract shape information.
The artificial whiskers that we designed do not measure torque
but record the deflection angle which is proportional to the
contact force or torque at a given distance. The term deflection
angle will be synonymously used with bending angle, which
corresponds to the transverse movement at the sensor position.
For a given torque τ in a contact phase of active whisking,
we can derive the bending displacement or slope of the whisker
from the Bernoulli–Euler equation, which is given as:
τ 2 1
E I tan θ = x − τx + τd (1)
2d 3
 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243 231

Fig. 2. Experiments with artificial whiskers (a) artificial whiskers on a Koala robot (four magnetic sensors and two microphone-based sensors at one side, and four
microphone-based sensors at front) (b) different types of objects formed by discs.

Fig. 3. Our active whisking system (a) active whisking and bending angle (the longitudinal axis of some whisker may not go through the centre of rotation) (b)
varying deflection distance with a given torque (if we take the reference axis from the center of rotation to the contact position, the angle β is the angle between
the surface slope and the reference axis, and the angle θd represents the angle of the whisker beam at contact position relative to the reference axis. The relation
between the two angles influences the deflection angle θ0 − θ1 ).

where tan θ is the slope at a position x (0 ≤ x ≤ d) along the
whisker bar, starting at the clamped position, θ is measured with
an axis connecting from the whisker base to the contact point,
and d is the distance of an object from the whisker base at the
onset of contact. The magnetic sensors in the artificial whisker
measure the deflection of the whisker 14 mm away from the
whisker base.
In our artificial whisker system displayed in Fig. 3, the
whisker base (clamped position) is 45 mm away from the
rotational axis of the DC motor, and the position of the whisker
base moves by the rotation of the DC motor. Now we define
the term contact distance as the distance to the contact position
from the center of rotation, and deflection distance as the
distance to the contact point from the whisker base. Thus, the
contact distance will be constant for a fixed contact position, but
the deflection distance changes in a sweeping period even with
a fixed contact location while the motor is rotating the support
plate shown in Fig. 3(a).
The position of whisker base for a rotational angle θ0 is
denoted by a vector cE with the centre of rotation as a reference
point — see Fig. 3. Then cE = (|E c| cos θ0 , |E
c| sin θ0 ) where
c| is the distance between the centre of rotation and the
|E
whisker base, and θ0 is measured relative to the axis from the
center of rotation to the contact position. The whisker shaft is
clamped at the whisker base and so the whisker base will be
alternatively called the clamped position, which provides one
of the boundary conditions of the Bernoulli–Euler equation. We
also define pE for a position vector on the contact point (| pE| will
be the distance from the centre of rotation to the contact point,
simply denoted as p in the text), and the motor axis will be the
reference point. Then | pE| and d = | pE − cE| represent contact
distance and deflection distance, respectively. If we take the
232 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243

Fig. 4. Theoretical deflection amplitudes depending on contact distance (with the assumption that the whisker bar is long enough to be bent with the corresponding
distance) (a) varying distances (γ = 0) (b) varying γ ’s (160 mm distance).

reference axis from the centre of rotation to the contact position, where the angles θ0 , θ1 and α change during the protraction
the angles at the whisker base and at the sensor position relative period, but γ is constant. From the above analysis for our
to the axis will be (θ0 + α), (θ1 + α), respectively, where whisker design, the deflection angle is inversely proportional to
α = cos−1 [ pE · ( pE − cE)/(| pE| · | pE − cE|)]. The instantaneous the contact distance as shown in Fig. 4(a), and smaller distances
torque at the whisker base depends on the distance between the increase the deflection angle more rapidly in proportion to
clamped position and the contact location. Thus, Eq. (1) can be protraction angle.
re-formulated as below: To determine the slope at contact position in active whisking
τ 2 1 (θd in Fig. 3), we can substitute x = 0 and x = d in Eq. (2).
E I tan(θ + α) = x − τ x + τ d. (2) Then we obtain
2d 3
By applying the sensor position x = h = 14 mm and the 1
tan[θd (t) − γ + α(t)] = − tan[θ0 (t) − γ + α(t)] (5)
clamped position x = 0 to the above equation, we can cancel 2
out τ and obtain the following equation from E I tan[θ0 (t) − γ + α(t)] = τ d/3 and E I tan[θd (t) −
 2
3h 3h
 γ + α(t)] = −τ d/6, where θd (t), θ0 (t) is the angle at contact
tan(θ1 + α) = − + 1 · tan(θ0 + α) (3) position and clamped position at time t, respectively (θ0 is set
2d 2 d
to 0 at the onset time of contact).
where h is the distance 14 mm between sensor position and
clamped position, and λ = θ0 − θ1 is the deflection angle or 2.2. Shape recognition
bending angle that the sensors measure, which is distinguished
from the protraction angle θ0 . The angle α between the two We now apply our biomimetic whiskers to the problem of
vectors, cE and pE − cE, is updated for each protraction angle recognizing the shape of a target object. To estimate slope or
θ0 . The above Eq. (3) implies that the bending angle alone curvature of an object, the whiskers need to touch many contact
is sufficient to estimate the contact distance1 as well as the points around the object. Theoretically, we can estimate the
deflection distance. shape of an object by collecting a set of distance values while
The longitudinal axis of a whisker may not go through the
the whisker is sliding over the surface of an object. This may
center of rotation. That is, the angle between cE and pE − cE at the
need free angular control of the whisker beam in 3-dimensional
onset time of contact may not be zero. Then the angle can be
space.2 In our experiments, we will test a restricted domain
defined as |γ | = cos−1 [Ec · ( pE − cE)/(|E
c| · | pE − cE|)]. The angle
of shape recognition based on just sweeping movements in
γ is the rotational angle of cE counterclockwise relative to the
the horizontal plane. We will observe the capabilities and
reference vector pE − cE, and we obtain θ0 + α = γ at the onset
limitations of a single whisker for shape recognition and also
of contact. With γ 6= 0, θ0 and θ1 should be replaced by θ0 − γ
evaluate the usefulness of multiple whiskers. First, we will
and θ1 − γ in Eq. (3), respectively. Then we have
investigate discriminating a round object and an edged-surface
 2
object, which will be called lateral shape recognition. Second,

3h 3h
tan(θ1 − γ + α) = − + 1 · tan(θ0 − γ + α) (4)
2d 2 d
2 Rodents use horizontal-plane sweeping to recognize the shape or texture
1 The contact distance | pE| can be calculated as | pE| = d cos(α) + |E
c| cos(θ0 ) with a series of head movement sequences in which increasingly refined
where |E
c| is 45 mm in our case. information is collected [5,11].
 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243 233

Fig. 5. Round and square objects and their change of contact position (α1 is the angle protracted before contact, and it determines the angular position of an object).

we will test discriminating vertical shapes (the shapes vary in

the perpendicular direction relative to the whisking plane).
Localization information, the contact distance and angular
position of a target object, is obtained by assuming that the
contact point is fixed. However, the contact point can vary
depending on the surface shape along the whisking direction.
To disambiguate the situations with fixed or varying contact
positions, we define a point contact as the situation in which the
contact position is fixed during the whisking period. A surface
contact is defined as the situation in which the contact point
varies.
Normally the surface contact depends on the surface slope
of target objects. A square object often experiences one fixed
contact position with the artificial whisker during the whisking
period, but if there is a narrow angle between the object side
and the neutral axis from the contact position to the whisker Fig. 6. Time course of the deflection amplitude for a fixed distance (thick
base, it may happen that the whisker can touch two edge curve: low-pass filtered signal, dotdashed: time course of protraction angle,
points as shown in Fig. 5. In contrast, a round object has a small oscillations represent natural frequencies).
varying surface slope starting with zero on the lateral surface
(surface along the whisking direction), and the contact position
continues to change along the surface. The distance decreases active whisking. The sensor signals (sampling rate 200 Hz)
in the protraction mode and the whisker system will experience were pre-processed by a low-pass filter; a 5th order lowpass
larger deflection angles than with point contact for each given Butterworth filter was used with a cutoff frequency 5 Hz to
protraction angle. remove signals related to the natural frequencies of the whisker
beam. Fig. 6 shows a typical time course of the deflection
3. Experiments amplitude for one fixed contact position. The protraction angle
was measured by the encoder of the DC motor. The deflection
In this paper, we do not intend to recognize an arbitrarily signal that the sensors measure was almost linearly proportional
shaped object. Instead we will try to discriminate regular shapes to the deflection angle in theory, and the signal is a dominant
such as a cube, a cylinder, a pyramid and a cone, which are feature for object localization. In the curve of deflection angle
formed by circular and square discs. That is, the target objects vs. protraction angle in Fig. 4(a), we can see that the monotonic
are vertical stacks of square or circular discs. First, we will region is in the range of protracting angles from 0◦ up to 30◦
observe the deflection angle that the whisker sensors measure, for small distances, for example, 100 mm. To determine the
and analyze its relevance for the estimation of contact distance.
distance from the observed deflection angles, we need to use the
Second, we will investigate how the deflection signal changes
monotonic region to avoid ambiguity in the mapping; therefore,
with a round object or a square object, and see if the time
the robot restricts the protraction angle after contact to less than
course of deflection signal can be a cue to discriminate round
30◦ .
and square objects. Third, we will show why multiple whiskers
To check the relationship between contact distance and
have advantages over a single whisker especially for shape
deflection angle, we collected temporal sensor signals during
recognition. Fourth, we test if the vertical displacement of a
whisker sweeps for different distances (100–240 mm with
single whisker as well as the time difference of contact onsets
20 mm steps). It was assumed that the whisker does not pass
or the difference of deflection amplitudes among multiple
by the object in the sweeping period. To see the influence of
whiskers can discriminate different vertical shapes.
contact distance, we tested varying distances of a square object
3.1. Deflection amplitude and velocity placed with a large side angle relative to the center of rotation
such that the whisker has a point contact with it. The sensor
To analyze temporal deflection information, we collected signals were pre-processed by a low-pass filter. We can easily
the time course of the deflection signal of a whisker during observe different deflection amplitudes depending on contact
234 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243

Fig. 7. Deflection signal for a cube (a) deflection amplitude (b) deflection velocity.

Fig. 8. Deflection signals depending on contact distance (top: deflection amplitude, bottom: deflection velocity) (a) square object for point contact (b) round object
with diameter 100 mm (c) square object with side length 50 mm and a side angle β = 16◦ (the protraction angle after contact was set to 21◦ , dotted: 0.62 Hz,
dotdashed: 0.81 Hz, solid: 1.07 Hz sweeping frequency).

distance — see Fig. 7. As expected, a shorter contact distance
produces a larger deflection amplitude. The deflection velocity,
which is calculated as a derivative of deflection amplitude, is
another cue to determine the contact distance. The deflection
amplitude and speed in Fig. 7 are inversely proportional to the
contact distance, as predicted in the theoretical estimation.
To investigate the influence of lateral shapes on deflection
angles, we measured the time course of deflection signals for
two different objects, a square object and a round object, and
determined the peaks of deflection amplitude and velocity. The
peak of deflection amplitude is found at the end of protraction.
The motor control circuit for the DC motor can adjust the
sweeping frequency and protraction/retraction angle of the
whisker. The protraction angle after the onset of contact and
the total sweeping angle of the whisker were set to about 21◦
and 51◦ , respectively. Fig. 8 displays the average over the peaks
of deflection amplitude and velocity for 16 whisking cycles for
each distance of the initial contact position (140–230 mm with
 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243
Fig. 9. Deflection amplitude vs. protraction angle (a) square object (b) round object with diameter 110 mm (arrow: protraction angle 10◦ after contact, the deflection
amplitudes for the two different types of objects are indistinguishable at this point).
10 mm steps). The error bars show 99% confidence intervals by
assuming a t-distribution. The deflection amplitudes for contact
distances of 180 mm or less are easily distinguishable. The
deflection velocity also differentiates the contact distance. For
point contact with a square object, the deflection amplitude
and velocity have a relatively small magnitude, although they
can discriminate contact distances — see Fig. 8(a). When
an artificial whisker sweeps past a round object such as a
cylinder, the contact distance constantly changes along the
curved surface. This is reflected in the deflection amplitude and
velocity as shown in Fig. 8(b). For a square object placed with a
side angle (see Fig. 3) β = 16◦ relative to the reference axis, the
whisker touched two edge-points consecutively. Fig. 8(c) shows
more pronounced deflection amplitude and velocity, since the
contact distance is rapidly decreasing when the whisker touches
the second edge point. The experiments imply that the type of
a target object influences the deflection amplitude. If the type
and distance of a target object are unknown, the peak values
of deflection amplitude or velocity may not be sufficient to
localize the object precisely, or recognize the shape. Thus, we
need a systematic approach to solve the problem.
3.2. Lateral shape
Recognizing the lateral shape of a target object is closely
related to distance estimation. Discriminating surface contact
and point contact often needs prior information of contact
distance at the onset of contact. Here, we will explore several
approaches to estimate the contact distance or to determine the
contact property.
For the experiments, we placed a round or square object at an
angular position of about 40◦ in the sweeping area of whiskers,
and collected deflection amplitudes of whiskers in the same
horizontal plane.
3.2.1. Observing deflection amplitudes of a single whisker
A set of deflection amplitudes for a sequence of protraction
angles is observed with a single whisker sweep. The contact
235
distance is estimated at small protraction angles and the
discrimination test between surface contact and point contact
is made at large protraction angles. In Fig. 9, we plot the
deflection amplitude depending on the protraction angles.
The deflection signal from zero up to approximately 40◦ of
protraction angle is almost zero in amplitude, which indicates
no deflection at all. For protraction angles larger than 40◦ , the
deflection amplitude increases in proportion to the protraction
angle. Thus, we can estimate the angular position of a target
object as well as the contact distance p in the curve of
deflection amplitude vs. protraction angle. For large protraction
angles, significant differences are visible for varying contact
distances and also for lateral shapes. The deflection amplitude
at protraction angle 50◦ , which has a protraction of 10◦ after
contact, may provide a better estimate of contact distance,
because deflection signals at small protraction angles are less
strongly influenced by the shape of a target object. In this
way, a set of deflection signals for small protraction angles can
determine the contact distance. Once the distance information is
given, we can distinguish based on large protractions between a
surface contact and a point contact. This method only needs the
time course of deflection for a single whisker, but the distance
estimation at small protraction angles may have a precision
problem, when we consider the influence of noise or natural
frequencies on deflection signals.
3.2.2. Observing deflection amplitudes of multiple whiskers
When multiple whiskers in the same horizontal plane contact
a target object, the advanced-touch whisker will have a large
variation in the deflection amplitude depending on the shape of
a target object when contact distance is fixed. In contrast, the
whisker with a delayed touch has almost the same deflection
level for a given contact distance over different types of
objects since it has a relatively small protraction angle after
contact. Thus, for a given contact distance, the difference of the
deflection amplitudes or distance estimation between the two
whiskers can discriminate point contact and surface contact.
Surface contact has a larger difference of deflection between
236 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243
Fig. 10. Deflection amplitude of whisker-1 and whisker-2 (a) square object with point contact (b) round object with diameter 110 mm (arrows indicate the contact
onset moment of the delayed whisker (whisker-2), upward: distance 120 mm, downward: distance 200 mm).
the whiskers than point contact. This method will be useful
if the time course of motor position or protraction angle is
not available. Fig. 10 shows the X –Y plot of the two whisker
signals over time. We will attend to the moment that the
delayed-touch whisker starts to contact the object, and take the
moment as a reference time for the measurement of deflection
angles of the advanced whisker. Arrows in the figure show the
onset time of contact of the delayed whisker (whisker-2). The
deflection amplitude of the advanced whisker (whisker-1) at the
reference time is inversely proportional to the contact distance.
We can see in Fig. 10 that there are several branching curves
which rise at different deflection angles from the horizontal
base line. To discriminate surface contact from point contact,
we can use the relative slope of deflection amplitudes of the two
whiskers. A round object produces a lower slope in the curve of
whisker-2 vs. whisker-1 than a square object with point contact;
the rate of the amplitude increase of the advanced whisker is
higher for a surface contact than that for a point contact, while
the delayed whisker has a similar rate of the amplitude change
for the two types of objects. Therefore, the X –Y plot of the two
whisker signals includes two kinds of information, the contact
distance and the shape of a target object. At least the plot
provides a cue to determine if the whisker has point contact
or surface contact.
We can consider another approach with multiple whiskers.
The time-shift or angular difference of the contact onsets
between a pair of whiskers can be examined from the whisker
signals and it can determine the contact distance; larger time-
shift indicates closer distance. The contact discrimination test
may be done based on the contact distance. The robot knows
what deflection levels would be expected at each protraction
for point contact, and can compare the measured signal with
the expected signal; if the measured signal is larger than
expected, it can be regarded as a surface contact. However,
in the experiments, the distance estimation with the time-shift
often yielded a very low precision result. The whiskers are
affected by the vibration in their natural frequencies,3 which
may cause a variation of contact onset time in the measurement.
A more refined sensor design including damping material could
improve the result.
So far we introduced methods for object localization and
lateral shape recognition. Now we describe the experiments to
identify square or round objects using the above methods.
3.2.3. Square object
For an edged-surface object, the deflection amplitudes
depend on how the edged surface is placed in the sweeping area
of the whisker. We adjusted the angle of a square object relative
to the axis from the rotational axis to the contact position, which
is denoted as β in Fig. 3. Fig. 11 shows an example of the effect
of varying β’s. For β’s smaller than 30◦ , the whisker touches
two-edge points and the contact distance for the second edge
point increases as β increases. Thus, small β’s result in high
deflection amplitudes. For large β’s, for instance, β = 30◦
or greater, the whisker experiences a point contact, because it
touches only the first edge point. The second whisker, which
has a delayed touch, has almost constant deflection amplitude
with varying β’s, because it has a point contact with the first
edge point. The graph of deflection amplitudes over the two
whiskers can determine the rotation angle of the square object
relative to the reference axis for a given contact distance. We
can use the methods described above to estimate the contact
distance.
Generally we can easily discriminate point contact and
surface contact by observing deflection amplitude or velocity.
How can we determine if a square object is rotated? If the
surface slope of the object is large, it is not possible to estimate
3 The distribution of natural frequencies depends on the boundary conditions
of the whisker beam. Conspicuous natural frequencies observed in the whisker
sensor signal correspond to the fixed-free boundary condition in which one tip
of the whisker shaft is clamped at the whisker base and the other tip is free in
space.
 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243
Fig. 11. Deflection amplitudes with a square object (side length 40 mm and contact distance 160 mm) (a) whisker-1 deflection vs. protraction angle (b) deflection
curve for whisker-1 vs. whisker-2.
the rotated angle with a single whisker. It will have a point
contact with only one fixed contact position. If a higher level
of deflection is observed than expected with point contact, we
can conclude that it is a surface contact. In the time course
of deflection (or the curve of deflection vs. protraction), we
can find the protraction angle where there is a transition from
single-edge to two-edge point contact. In Fig. 11(a), there are
many branches in the upward direction from the curve for
β = 30◦ . The branches start at different protraction angles. The
curve for β = 30◦ corresponds to point contact with a square
object, and the branches with smaller β’s reflect a contact with
the second edge point. That is, the branching point indicates the
moment when the whisker touches the second edge point. Also
we can observe the deflection amplitude at other protraction
angles after the branching angle. This will determine the contact
distance of the second edge point. From the angular information
and the contact distance, we can estimate the side length of
a square object as well as the rotated angle. For example,
β = 12◦ has a branching point at around 11◦ of protraction after
contact. By the geometrical relation in Fig. 3, we can first find
α = 4.2◦ . Using Eq. (5), we can estimate θd = 11.9◦ , which is
very close to the rotated angle 12◦ of the square object. If we
calculate the difference between the deflection amplitude for
β = 12◦ and the amplitude for β = 30◦ at a specific reference
protraction, we can obtain a pure deflection amplitude that the
second edge point with β = 12◦ contributes to. The branching
curve has a deflection amplitude of 1 V at a protraction angle
of 10◦ after the branch angle of protraction, while β = 30◦
has 0.6 V at the protraction angle. Thus, the second edge point
has a contribution of about 0.4 V at a protraction angle of 10◦
after the contact, which corresponds to the contact distance
120 mm. Assuming the contact distance of the first edge point
is estimated as 160 mm (by observing the deflection signals
of the two whiskers), we can determine the side length of a
square object by (160 − 120)/ cos(12◦ ) = 40.9 mm, which
approximates the original size of 40 mm.
237
3.2.4. Round object
Now we investigate the deflection signal of a single whisker
for the case of round objects. Unlike edged-surface objects,
round objects always have surface contact, and also the
curvature of objects influences the deflection angles as shown
in Fig. 5. Objects with larger curvature have a shorter contact
distance for a given protraction angle, and as a result, they have
higher deflection amplitudes in time course.
For round objects with varying curvature, we measured the
deflection amplitudes with respect to the protraction angle in
the artificial whisker system. Fig. 12(a), (b) show examples
of the deflection amplitudes which are averaged over five
sweeps of whisking. For a given contact distance, a round
object with a larger diameter size produces a significantly
higher deflection amplitude than a round object with smaller
diameter. Fig. 12(c), (d) show the effect of varying curvature
of round objects on deflection amplitudes for a fixed contact
distance. Round objects with large diameter do not only
produce larger amplitudes, but also experience more variation
of contact distances along the surface. The difference of
deflection amplitudes over varying size of round objects is more
prominent with large protraction angles. At small protraction
angles up to 10◦ after contact, the deflection amplitudes for
various round objects are very similar and the influence of the
curvature is minute. This provides further support for using
small protraction angles to estimate the distance for the initial
contact position.
The above deflection experiments reveal that a single
whisker, within the sensor resolution, has the potential of
distinguishing arbitrary pairs of contact distance and diameter
size for round objects. The robot can estimate the contact
distance of a round object at small protraction angles and
determine the diameter at large protraction angles, for instance,
at 20◦ of protraction after contact.
3.2.5. Discriminating square and round objects
How can we discriminate a round object from a square object
with two edge points when their deflection curve is similar?
238 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243

Fig. 12. Deflection amplitude vs. protraction angle for varying contact distances and varying size of round objects (a) circular disc with diameter 45 mm (b) circular
disc with diameter 100 mm (c) varying diameters of circular discs with contact distance 140 mm (D: diameter size) (d) varying diameters of circular discs with
contact distance 120 mm.

It would be a difficult task to discriminate a curved surface
and an edged surface including more than one point contact
using the deflection amplitude alone, if the size and distance
of objects are unknown. The whiskers may not discriminate the
two objects easily, if they have a similar transition of contact
distances along the surface. The task needs high precision
sensors to measure the transition of deflection. Theoretically
their curves of deflection angle over time are different (an edged
surface will produce a more sudden change of deflection as well
as high deflection velocity at the transition between edges), but
noisy sensor signals and the presence of the whisker beam’s
natural frequencies make these differences hard to detect.
An alternative solution to the problem is that we can change
the robot position and collect another set of deflection signals.
For instance, after further moving the robot towards the target
object by 10 mm, we can again collect the deflection signals for
the two whiskers. Then we can estimate the size and shape of
the object by observing the sequence of X –Y plot of the whisker
signals. Fig. 13 shows the X –Y plot of two whiskers in the same
horizontal plane for varying distances. A square object at a
distance of 150 mm has very similar deflection curve to a round
object at a distance of 140 mm and thus the shape information
cannot be retrieved although we may determine if the touch
is a point contact or surface contact. If the robot changes the
contact distance, the response curves of deflection for the two
objects are completely different. Thus, a collection of deflection
signals at different distances can provide the appropriate shape
information.
It is an advantage of multiple whiskers over a single
whisker that a round object and an edged-surface object can
be discriminated more precisely. In principle, a single whisker
can distinguish point contact from surface contact, using the
deflection signal. However, adding localization information by
another whisker will provide more reliable information of the
contact distance and shape of a target object.
3.3. Vertical shape by the slip of a single whisker
Kaneko et al. [14] provides a geometrical analysis on
the relationship between varying force directions and the
corresponding slip. In their experiments, the force direction of
the beam was iteratively changed towards a normal direction
 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243
Fig. 13. Deflection amplitudes of two whiskers for round and square objects
(the side length of the square object was 35 mm, which was rotated with
a side angle 15◦ and the diameter of round object was 110 mm, arrow:
indistinguishable deflection signals for a square object at a distance of 150 mm
and a round object at a distance of 140 mm).
with respect to the surface with the help of slip information.
However, there was no process to translate the whisker slip
into the shape of objects directly and the method required a
set of contact positions to build a contour of an object. In our
active whisker system, we use two channels of sensor signals,
horizontal and vertical, together to evaluate the slip of the
whisker. The deflection of both channels is directly correlated
with the surface slope of target objects.
Fig. 14 shows how we tested this method of slope
recognition. We first use an aluminium bar whose slope
angle can be adjusted freely. The slope angle is measured
anticlockwise from the horizontal line and the whisker touches
the aluminium bar from the side. Normally the whisker shaft
follows the angle of slope and the sensors at the whisker base
can estimate the slope angle from the X –Y plot. Fig. 15(a)
shows examples of the X –Y plot. The whisker draws an
elliptical deflection curve and the curves in the inner part
(which are represented as thick lines in the figure) indicate
the surface slope of the test bar (the inner and outer parts
indicate the protracting and retracting phase in a whisking
period, respectively). Each slope angle was measured over 10
sweeping cycles, and a set of averaged slope angles is shown in
Fig. 15(b). The estimate of the slope angle from the X –Y plot
quite well agrees with the real slope of the bar.
As an extension of the experiments, we tested objects with
conical shapes. Fig. 16 shows the deflection signals of two
types of cones for 3–5 sweeps of a whisker, and the inner part
(protraction phase) of the curve for each whisking cycle shows
a steady slope, which represents the surface slope of a cone.
To see the effect of the contact protraction angle4 on the slope
estimation, we measured the two channel sensor signals over
several contact protraction angles (4◦ –16◦ ). Regardless of the
4 The robot can adjust the maximal protraction angle (sweeping angle) and
we measured the protraction angle after the onset of contact, corresponding
to the sweeping angle during the contact duration. This is called the contact
protraction angle.
239
Fig. 14. Slope test configuration; the angle of aluminium bar is adjusted for
the slope test, and the slope angle is measured counter-clockwise from the
horizontal line.
protraction angles, the slope information can be obtained from
the X –Y plot. In the retraction period, they have a different
course of whisker movement, depending on the curvature of
the object, the protraction angle, surface friction and the elastic
property of the whisker material. Presumably, the shape of the
X –Y plot may reveal the curvature of an object under certain
conditions.
3.4. Vertical shape by multiple whiskers
In the case of ragged surfaces or strong friction, or for steep
vertical slopes, the artificial whisker will not be able to slide
along the object’s surface. To overcome this limitation of a
single whisker, we use multiple vertically stacked whiskers
to recognize the vertical shape of a target object. We built
a conically-shaped object consisting of circular disks with
different diameters (each disc has a height of 10 mm), and we
stacked two magnetic whiskers vertically. In this case, we do
not observe any whisker slip in vertical direction. The onset
time of deflection can determine the angular position of an
object as well as the vertical shape. For example, a conically
shaped object produces a time-shift of the deflection signal
between the upper whisker and the lower whisker.
Fig. 17 shows the time course of deflection signals for a
conically-shaped object. In Fig. 17(a), the upper whisker has
a relatively small amplitude, since its contact duration with the
object is short. We can first estimate the distance information
by the magnitude of deflection amplitude or deflection velocity.
Then we calculate the difference between the peak amplitude in
the upper whisker signal and that in the lower. The sign of the
difference will determine which part, the upper or the lower, is
contacted first. The difference between the two amplitudes at a
given contact distance will provide information about the size
difference between the upper and the lower part. We can also
estimate the vertical shape by a time shift in deflection velocity
signals — see Fig. 17(b). However, fast sweeping produces
a small time shift, which may result in a precision problem
when estimating the relative size difference. It seems that the
difference between the deflection amplitudes can be a more
prominent cue to recognize the vertical shape.
To analyze the time shift of deflection between the upper and
the lower whisker, two types of circular discs were stacked to
build a test object, which has a distance 180 mm for the initial
contact position. The lower part has a disc whose diameter was
240 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243

Fig. 15. X –Y plot of deflection signals (a) examples of X –Y plot over two channels with several slope tests (thick lines: estimated slope) (b) estimation of slope
with X –Y channels (◦: real data, solid line: theory)

Fig. 16. X –Y plot of deflection signals for two types of conically-shaped objects (dotted: 16◦ , dotdashed: 12◦ , dashed: 8◦ , solid: 4◦ of contact protraction angle).

Fig. 17. Time course of deflection signals for a conically-shaped object (a) deflection amplitude (b) deflection velocity (the upper and lower whiskers contact
circular disks with 105 mm and 70 mm diameters, respectively).
 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243 241

Fig. 18. Time difference and amplitude difference of two whiskers stacked vertically for relative size difference (sweeping frequency 0.77 Hz is used and the error
bar indicates 95% confidence interval by t statistic over five whisking cycles) (a) time difference (b) difference of deflection amplitude at the end of protraction
(lower whisker – upper whisker).

110 mm and the upper one has varying sizes from 25 mm or vibration speed of rodent whiskers than to deflection
to 115 mm. The discs are positioned such that both vertically amplitude [23,2,3].
stacked whiskers can touch the discs. Thus, the maximum size
difference will be 85 mm. Fig. 18 shows the averaged time 4. Discussion
difference and amplitude difference over five whisking cycles
We suggested that localization information of a target object
for varying size differences; low-pass filtered signals are used
should be the basis of shape recognition. Active whisking
as in the above experiments. The time difference was calculated
allows one to determine the distance and angular position of
by measuring the instantaneous times at the peaks of deflection
an object only by measuring the time course of deflection
velocities, where the time for the maximal deflection velocity
amplitude. The method is not affected by the elastic property
is close to the contact onset5 time. The amplitude difference
of the whisker material or by the diameter of the whisker.
was calculated by measuring deflection amplitudes at the end
The deflection amplitude and deflection velocity signals shown
of protraction. The time difference or amplitude difference is
in the experiments correspond to the activation of slowly
almost linearly proportional to the size difference of circular
adapting (SA) and rapidly adapting (RA) mechanoreceptors at
discs. As shown in Fig. 18, the amplitude difference can predict
the follicle, respectively. The two types of neurons are very
the relative size difference more exactly, since the time shift of
common in biological tactile sensors such as the skin or the
deflection between the two whiskers tends to be influenced by
whisker follicle of animals [12,24]. The former type of neurons
noise.
can signal stimulus magnitude for a given pressure, while the
As an alternative sensor technology, an array of piezoelectric
latter type of neurons cease firing in response to sustained
sensors directly produces the deflection velocity instead of
stimulation but is sensitive only when the stimulus amplitude
the deflection amplitude. A stack of piezo-type whiskers
changes. Recent physiological experiments show that SA and
provide the time-shift in the velocity signals depending on
RA neurons in the trigeminal ganglion distinctively respond to
the vertical shape of an object. Thus, the shape of an object
several modes of active whisking such as touching an object,
can be determined from the temporal whisker signal obtained
whisker bending, and detaching from an object [24]. Moreover,
for a given sweeping speed. The pattern of the velocity
it was reported that neurons in the barrel cortex encode the
signals from piezoelectric sensors is quite close to that from
deflection velocity of rodent whiskers [23,2,3], which is closely
magnetic sensors (not shown in this paper). The velocity
related with the property of RA cells. In contrast, the SA
signal of piezoelectric sensors can be a dominant feature to
cells at the follicle can differentiate the deflection level of
detect the vertical shape of an object, as is the deflection
the whisker shaft [9] and achieve directional selectivity which
amplitude measured with magnetic sensors. Unlike the above
seems to be passed to the thalamic neurons in the brain [17].
results with magnetic sensors for the vertical shape, it seems
Thus, our active whisker system is closely in line with the
that real rodents might have a preference to use deflection
biological process to use deflection amplitude and velocity
velocities rather than deflection amplitudes, because neurons
as sensory afferents. It was also shown that modeling the
in barrel cortex are more responsive to the deflection velocity
mechanoreceptors as strain sensors for deflection can produce
similar patterns of ganglion neuron firings [19]. Thus, the
5 Actually, the time for the maximal velocity does not exactly match the onset suggested method of tactile perception appears to be a plausible
time of contact, since we use low-pass filtered outputs over noisy sensor signals. mechanism for rodent whisking behaviour. The deflection
242 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243
Table 1
Methods with artificial whiskers ; each method is described in the following sections, s1: Section 3.1, s2, s3: Section 3.2.1, s4: Section 3.3, m1, m2: Section 3.2.2,
m3: Sections 3.2.2–3.2.4, m4: Section 3.2.5, m5, m6: Section 3.4
Single whisker
No. Method
s1 Deflection amplitude/velocity
s2 Deflection signals at various protractions
s3 Deflection signals at various protractions
s4 Two orthogonal channels
Multiple whiskers
No. Method
m1 Time-shift of contact onsets
m2 Deflection at the contact onset of a delayed whisker
m3 X –Y plot over whisker-2 vs. whisker-1
m4 Collection of deflection signals at various robot positions
m5 Time-shift of deflection velocity
m6 Difference between deflections of multiple whiskers
a Indicates high precision results.
b Indicates low precision results.
signals of whiskers can be one of the main sources of shape
information.
Shape information of an object is divided into two parts,
lateral and vertical shape information with respect to the
whisking direction. Multiple whiskers provide more reliable
information of shape or distance of a target object than
a single whisker. In addition, the shape recognition may
be involved with the integration of motion direction across
multiple vibrissae [1]. Brecht et al. [5] assumed that the
whiskers of rodents may be binary sensors which only tell
if touched or not, and that the clusters of whiskers at each
side of face play a major role in detecting the distance of
an object. Our experiments support that each whisker has the
capability to provide continuous distance information rather
than just binary information as well as to track directional cues.
The shape can be derived from a combination of distance, the
two channel information of a whisker, or the time difference
of contact onsets retrieved using multiple whiskers. It seems
that head movement is involved with shape recognition or
texture discrimination of rodents [5,11]. In our experiments,
precise recognition of shape, for example, to distinguish a
curved surface from an edged surface, would need a collection
of whisking signals at different robot positions, which may
resemble the behaviour pattern that rodents use to refine tactile
sensory information. We summarize the methods used for
distance estimation and shape recognition with our artificial
whiskers in Table 1.
In principle, the time course of deflection signals with
a single whisker can be a direct source of lateral shape
information, if high precision of sensor signals are available.
Our experiments show that a single whisker alone can
distinguish point contact and surface contact, but it may have
difficulty in discriminating a curved surface and an edged
surface, since the precision of the deflection signal is reduced by
noise and natural frequencies. So far there is no physiological or
behavioral data available on the precision of tactile localization
Task
Object localizationa
Point and surface contacta
Lateral shape
Slope of objects (smooth surface)a
Task
Object localizationb
Object localization
Lateral shape
Lateral shapea
Vertical shapeb
Vertical shape (ragged surface)a
or shape detection in rodents. It is still an open question whether
rodents can discriminate complex shapes with a single whisker,
or whether they interpret each whisker sensor as a simplified
binary sensor or low-precision sensor and use multiple whiskers
for shape recognition processing.
5. Conclusion
In this paper, we suggest a new approach to recognizing the
shape of a target object with a mechanical probe. The method
uses biomimetic whiskers to model the design of the follicle
of rodent whiskers. Deflection amplitude or deflection velocity
signals provide localization information of a target object, that
is, contact distance and angular position of an object. Also they
show the potential of detecting lateral shape and the vertical
shape of objects. For lateral shape recognition, we found the
deflection amplitude changes depending on whether a sweep
of whiskers experiences point contact or surface contact along
the surface of a target object. This effect is caused by the
dependency of deflection on the contact distance. The deflection
signal helps discriminate round objects with a varying curvature
or objects with different lateral shapes, like round and square
objects. We present several methods to estimate the contact
distance and to detect the lateral shape of a target object with a
single whisker or with multiple whiskers. Multiple whiskers can
provide more precise information of shape and contact distance
rather than a single whisker.
A single whisker with two channels arranged orthogonally
to each other can recognize the slope of the vertical shape.
Alternatively, the vertical shape can be estimated by two or
more whiskers stacked vertically. For instance, a conically
shaped object will produce a time-shift in whisker signals
between the upper whisker and the lower whisker. The
time-shift of contact can be measured by observing the
deflection velocity. Another approach is to use the time course
of deflection amplitudes, since the difference of deflection
amplitudes also provides the vertical shape information.
 D. Kim, R. Möller / Robotics and Autonomous Systems 55 (2007) 229–243
The suggested methods for shape recognition may provide
a clue to how real rodents process tactile signals of their
whiskers for shape recognition, and can be applied to provide
autonomous robots with the same capabilities.
Acknowledgement
This work has been supported by the EU in the project
AMOUSE (IST-2000-28127).
References
[1] M.L. Andermann, C.I. Moore, A somatotopic map of vibrissa motion
direction within a barrel column, Nature Neuroscience 9 (2006) 543–551.
[2] E. Arabzadeh, R.S. Petersen, M.E. Diamond, Encoding of whisker
vibration by rat barrel cortex neurons: Implications for texture
discrimination, Journal of Neuroscience 27 (2003) 9146–9154.
[3] E. Arabzadeh, E. Zorzin, M.E. Diamond, Neuronal encoding of texture in
the whisker sensory pathway, PLOS Biology 3 (1) (2005) 155–165.
[4] S. Bovet, R. Pfeifer, Emergence of delayed reward learning from
sensorimotor coordination, in: Proceedings of the Int. Conf. on Intelligent
Robots and Systems, IEEE, 2005, pp. 841–846.
[5] M. Brecht, B. Preilowski, M.M. Merzenich, Functional architecture of the
mystacial vibrissae, Behavioural Brain Research 84 (1–2) (1997) 81–97.
[6] G.E. Carvell, D.J. Simons, Biometric analyses of vibrissal tactile
discrimination in the rat, The Journal of Neuroscience 10 (8) (1990)
2638–2648.
[7] M. Fend, Whisker-based texture discrimination on a mobile robot,
in: Proceedings of the European Conf. on Artificial Life, Springer Verlag,
2005, pp. 302–311.
[8] M. Fend, S. Bovet, H. Yokoi, R. Pfeifer, An active artificial whisker array
for texture discrimination, in: IEEE Conf. on Int. Robots & Systems,
IEEE, 2003, pp. 1044–1049.
[9] K.-M. Gottschaldt, A. Iggo, D.W. Young, Functional characteristics of
mechanoreceptors in sinus hair follicles of the cat, Journal of Physiology
235 (1973) 287–315.
[10] J.A. Hartings, S. Temereanca, D.J. Simons, High responsiveness and
direction sensitivity of neurons in the rat thalamic reticular nucleus to
vibrissa deflection, Journal of Neurophysiology 83 (5) (2000) 2791–2801.
[11] M.J. Hartmann, Active sensing capabilities of the rat whisker system,
Autonomous Robots 11 (2001) 249–254.
[12] E.R. Kandel, J.H. Schwartz, T.M. Jessell, Principles of Neural Science,
fourth ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 2000.
[13] M. Kaneko, N. Kanayama, T. Tsuji, Vision based active antenna,
in: International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE, 1996,
pp. 2555–2560.
[14] M. Kaneko, N. Kanayama, T. Tsuji, Active antenna for contact sensing,
IEEE Transactions on Robotics and Automation 14 (2) (1998) 278–291.
[15] A.G. Kelly, Fundamentals of Mechanical Vibration, second ed., Mc-Graw
Hill, 2000.
[16] D. Kim, R. Möller, A biomimetic whisker for texture discrimination
and distance estimation, in: S. Schaal, et al. (Eds.), From Animals to
Animats 8, Proceedings of the International Conference on the Simulation
of Adaptive Behavior, MIT Press, 2004, pp. 140–149.
[17] S.H. Lichtenstein, G.E. Carvell, D.J. Simons, Responses of rat trigeminal
ganglion neurons to movement of vibrissae in different directions,
Somatosensory and Motor Research 7 (1) (1990) 47–65.
243
[18] M. Lungarella, V.V. Hafner, R. Pfeifer, H. Yokoi, An artificial whisker
sensor for robotics, in: IEEE Int. Conference on Intelligent Robots and
Systems, IEEE, 2002, pp. 2931–2936.
[19] B. Mitchinson, K. Gurney, P. Redgrave, C. Melhuish, M. Pearson,
I. Gilhespy, T. Prescott, Empirically inspired simulated electro-
mechanical model of the rat mystacial follicle-sinus-complex, Pro-
ceedings of Royal Society B: Biological Sciences 271 (1556) (2004)
2509–2516.
[20] D.J. Pinto, J.C. Brumberg, D.J. Simons, Circuit dynamics and coding
strategies in rodent somatosensory cortex, Journal of Neurophysiology 83
(3) (2000) 1158–1166.
[21] R.A. Russell, Using tactile whiskers to measure surface contours,
in: International Conference on Robotics and Automation, IEEE, 1992,
pp. 1295–1299.
[22] A. Seth, J. McKinstry, G. Edelman, J. Krichmar, Spatiotemporal
processing of whisker input supports texture discrimination by a brain-
based device, in: S. Schaal, A. Ijspeert, A. Billard, S. Vijayakumar,
J. Hallam, J.-A. Meyer (Eds.), From Animals to Animats 8, Proceedings
of the International Conference on the Simulation of Adaptive Behavior,
MIT Press, 2004, pp. 130–139.
[23] M. Shoykhet, D. Doherty, D.J. Simons, Coding of deflection velocity
and amplitude by whisker primary afferent neurons: Implications for
higher level processing, Somatosensory and Motor Research 17 (2) (2000)
171–180.
[24] M. Szwed, K. Bagdasarian, E. Ahissar, Encoding of vibrissal active touch,
Neuron 40 (2003) 621–630.
[25] T. Tsujimura, T. Yabuta, Object detection by tactile sensing method
employing force/torque information, IEEE Transactions on Robotics and
Automation 5 (4) (1989) 444–450.
[26] N. Ueno, M. Kaneko, Dynamic active antenna, in: Proc. of Int. Conf. on
Robotics and Automation, IEEE, 1994, pp. 1784–1790.
[27] J.F. Wilson, A. Chen, A whisker probe system for shape perception of
solids, ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control
117 (1995) 104–108.
DaeEun Kim received his B.E. and MSc(Eng) in
the department of computer science and engineering
from Seoul National University and the University
of Michigan at Ann Arbor, respectively. He was a
lecturer in Korea Air Force Academy from 1994 to
1997 and then joined a research team involving with
the bus-underground smartcard ticketing system in
Seoul. He received Ph.D. degree from the University
of Edinburgh in 2002. From 2002 to 2006, he was
a research scientist in Max Planck Institute for Human Cognitive and Brain
Sciences. Currently he is a senior researcher in University of Leicester. His
research interests are in the area of biorobotics, autonomous robots, artificial
life, neural networks and neurobiology.
Ralf Möller received a Ph.D. in electrical engineering
from the Technical University of Ilmenau, Germany,
and a Venia legendi in computer science from the
University of Zurich, Switzerland. He is heading
the Computer Engineering Group at the Faculty of
Technology of Bielefeld University. His research
interests include neural networks, models of visual
cognition, visual robot navigation, and biorobotics.