Search research articles

ABOUT JoVE

Overview Leadership Blog JoVE Help Center

AUTHORS

Publishing Process Editorial Board Scope & Policies Peer Review FAQ Submit

LIBRARIANS

Testimonials Subscriptions Access Resources Library Advisory Board FAQ

RESEARCH

JoVE Journal Methods Collections JoVE Encyclopedia of Experiments Archive

EDUCATION

JoVE Core JoVE Business JoVE Science Education JoVE Lab Manual Faculty Resource Center Faculty Site

Terms & Conditions of Use

Related Concept Videos

Open and closed-loop control systems

Open and closed-loop control systems

Control systems are foundational elements in automation and engineering. They are broadly categorized into open-loop and closed-loop systems. These classifications hinge on the presence or absence of feedback mechanisms, significantly influencing the system's performance, complexity, and application.
An open-loop control system operates without feedback from the output. It consists of two primary elements: the controller and the controlled process. The controller receives an input signal...

Feedback control systems

Feedback control systems

Feedback control systems are categorized in various ways based on their design, analysis, and signal types.
Linear feedback systems are theoretical models that simplify analysis and design. These systems operate under the principle that their output is directly proportional to their input within certain ranges. For instance, an amplifier in a control system behaves linearly as long as the input signal remains within a specific range. However, most physical systems exhibit inherent nonlinearity...

Feedback Loops

Feedback Loops

In most cases, excessive hormone production is prevented by negative feedback—a loop that starts with a stimulus inducing the release of a particular substance, like a hormone, to maintain a certain level before triggering a signal that results in a decrease in further release of the hormone.

Design Example: Resistive Touchscreen

Design Example: Resistive Touchscreen

A device engineer plays a crucial role in designing user interfaces for mobile devices. One such interface is the resistive touchscreen, which fundamentally consists of two metallic layers: a flexible upper layer and a rigid lower layer, separated by a narrow gap. The high resistance between these two layers is a key characteristic of this design.
When a user touches the screen, the two layers make contact at a specific point known as the touchpoint. This contact reduces the resistance between...

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by

Same author

A built-in electric field induces a high-performance hydrogen evolution reaction on a self-supporting MoO<sub>2</sub>-NiP/NF heterojunction.

Nanoscale·2026

Same author

A few-shot high-resolution remote sensing image semantic segmentation method.

Scientific reports·2026

Same author

In-silico study of machine learning discovers de novo lipogenesis for predicting prognosis and immunotherapy responses in kidney renal clear cell carcinoma.

Biology direct·2026

Same author

Real-world evaluation of deep learning decoders for motor imagery EEG-based BCIs.

Frontiers in systems neuroscience·2025

Same author

Correction: Correction to: Tumor-associated macrophage-derived exosomes transmitting miR-193a-5p promote the progression of renal cell carcinoma via TIMP2-dependent vasculogenic mimicry.

Cell death & disease·2025

Same author

Synergistically promoting proton-coupled electron transfer of oxygen reduction with dual atomic sites on high-curvature carbon onions for highly efficient Zn-air batteries.

Nanoscale·2025

Search research articles

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Nov 15, 2025

A Tactile Automated Passive-Finger Stimulator TAPS

A Tactile Automated Passive-Finger Stimulator TAPS

Published on: June 3, 2009

Online Closed-Loop Control Using Tactile Feedback Delivered Through Surface and Subdermal Electrotactile Stimulation.

Jian Dong^1,2, Winnie Jensen², Bo Geng²

¹Department of Orthopedics, The Second Hospital of Jilin University, Changchun, China.

Frontiers in Neuroscience

|March 8, 2021

Summary

Subdermal stimulation offers a minimally invasive way to provide tactile feedback for prosthetic limbs. While surface stimulation currently offers better control, subdermal methods show promise for future sensate prostheses.

Keywords:

closed-loop control electrical stimulation prostheses sensory feedback subdermal electrodes

More Related Videos

Force and Position Control in Humans - The Role of Augmented Feedback

Force and Position Control in Humans - The Role of Augmented Feedback

Published on: June 19, 2016

Tactile Semiautomatic Passive-Finger Angle Stimulator TSPAS

Tactile Semiautomatic Passive-Finger Angle Stimulator TSPAS

Published on: July 30, 2020

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Nov 15, 2025

A Tactile Automated Passive-Finger Stimulator TAPS

A Tactile Automated Passive-Finger Stimulator TAPS

Published on: June 3, 2009

Force and Position Control in Humans - The Role of Augmented Feedback

Force and Position Control in Humans - The Role of Augmented Feedback

Published on: June 19, 2016

Tactile Semiautomatic Passive-Finger Angle Stimulator TSPAS

Tactile Semiautomatic Passive-Finger Angle Stimulator TSPAS

Published on: July 30, 2020

Area of Science:

Biomedical Engineering
Neuroscience
Rehabilitation Technology

Background:

Limb loss significantly impacts quality of life, with prostheses aiming to restore function and appearance.
Integrating prostheses with users via somatosensory feedback can enhance performance, confidence, and embodiment.
Subdermal electrode placement offers a minimally invasive approach for delivering tactile feedback.

Purpose of the Study:

To evaluate online control quality using subdermal electrotactile stimulation.
To compare subdermal stimulation with traditional surface stimulation.
To investigate the effect of training on both stimulation modalities.

Main Methods:

Ten able-bodied subjects performed a compensatory tracking task using a joystick.
Feedback on tracking error was delivered via surface and subdermal electrotactile stimulation.
Performance was assessed using correlation coefficient (CORR), root mean square error (RMSE), and time delay.

Main Results:

Both surface and subdermal stimulation enabled good closed-loop control.
Surface stimulation yielded superior results in CORR (86% vs 77%) and RMSE (0.23 vs 0.31) compared to subdermal.
Subdermal stimulation's RMSE significantly improved within the initial trials.

Conclusions:

Subdermal stimulation is a feasible method for tactile feedback in prosthetics.
Current online control quality with subdermal stimulation is lower than with surface stimulation.
The minimally invasive nature of subdermal interfaces makes them attractive for future sensate prostheses.