Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
We began in 1967 a project to develop a haptic+display for 6-D force fields of interacting protein molecules. We approached it in four stages: a 2-D system, a 3-D system tested with a simple task, a 6-D system tested with a simple task, and a full 6-D molecular docking system, our initial goal. This paper summarizes the entire project---the four systems, the evaluation experiments, the results, and our observations. The molecular docking system results are new.Our principal conclusions are:• Haptic display as an augmentation to visual display can improve perception and understanding both of force fields and of world models populated with impenetrable objects.• Whereas man-machine systems can outperform computer-only systems by orders of magnitude on some problems, haptic-augmented interactive systems seem to give about a two-fold performance improvement over purely graphical interactive systems. Better technology may give somewhat more, but a ten-fold improvement does not seem to be in the cards.• Chemists using GROPE-III can readily reproduce the true docking positions for drugs whose docking is known (but not to them) and can find very good docks for drugs whose true docks are unknown. The present tool promises to yield new chemistry research results; it is being actively used by research chemists.• The most valuable result from using GROPE-III for drug docking is probably the radically improved situation awareness that serious users report. Chemists say they have a new understanding of the details of the receptor site and its force fields, and of why a particular drug docks well or poorly.• We see various scientific/education applications for haptic displays but believe entertainment, not scientific visualization, will drive and pace the technology.• The hardware-software system technology we have used is barely adequate, and our experience sets priorities for future development.• Some unexpected perceptual phenomena were observed. All of these worked for us, not against us.
Brooks et al. (Sat,) studied this question.