ArticleScientific reports2025
A neuromorphic electronic artist for robotic painting.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- An intelligent HMM-based system for training brush techniques in ink painting.Scientific reports · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recent advances in deep learning have sparked interest in AI-generated art, including robot-assisted painting. Traditional painting machines use static images and offline processing without considering the dynamic nature of painting. Neuromorphic cameras, which capture light intensity changes through asynchronous events, and mixed-signal neuromorphic processors, which implement biologically plausible spiking neural networks, offer a promising alternative. In this work, we present a robotic painting system comprising a 6-DOF robotic arm, event-based input from a Dynamic Vision Sensor (DVS) camera and a neuromorphic processor to produce dynamic brushstrokes, and tactile feedback from a force-torque sensor to compensate for brush deformation. The system receives DVS events representing the desired brushstroke trajectory and maps these events onto the processor's neurons to compute joint velocities in close-loop. The variability in the input's noisy event streams and the processor's analog circuits reproduces the heterogeneity of human brushstrokes. Tested in a real-world setting, the system successfully generated diverse physical brushstrokes. This network marks a first step towards a fully spiking robotic controller with ultra-low latency responsiveness, applicable to any robotic task requiring real-time closed-loop adaptive control.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.