erwan/phd-thesis
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull Requests Actions Packages Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Typo

Browse Source
This commit is contained in:
Erwan Normand
2024-06-28 00:21:02 +02:00
parent ae481d4584
commit aa6961230e
6 changed files with 13 additions and 13 deletions
Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
3-manipulation/visual-hand/3-2-grasp.tex
View File

@@ -1,7 +1,7 @@
\subsubsection{Grasp Task}
\subsection{Grasp Task}
\label{sec:grasp}
\subsubsubsection{Completion Time}
\subsubsection{Completion Time}
\label{sec:grasp_tct}
On the time to complete a trial, there was one statistically significant effect %
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ but not of Hand (\anova{5}{2868}{1.8}, \p{0.1}, see \figref{results/Grasp-Comple
Targets on the back and the left (N, NW, and W) were slower than targets on the front (SW, S, and SE, \p{0.003}) {except for} NE (back-right) which was also fast.
\subsubsubsection{Contacts}
\subsubsection{Contacts}
\label{sec:grasp_contacts_count}
On the number of contacts, there were two statistically significant effects: %
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ But, surprisingly, only Tips and Mesh were statistically significantly better, n
Targets on the back and left were more difficult (N, NW, and W) than targets on the front (SW, S, and SE, \pinf{0.001}).
\subsubsubsection{Time per Contact}
\subsubsection{Time per Contact}
\label{sec:grasp_time_per_contact}
On the mean time spent on each contact, there were two statistically significant effects: %
@@ -49,7 +49,7 @@ The Tips rendering seemed to provide one of the best feedback for the grasping,
This time was the shortest on the front S than on the other target volumes (\pinf{0.001}).
\subsubsubsection{Grip Aperture}
\subsubsection{Grip Aperture}
\label{sec:grasp_grip_aperture}
On the average distance between the thumb's fingertip and the other fingertips during grasping, there were two