MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1493172977 · doi:10.1109/isic.1994.367827

Sensor-based online trajectory generation for smoothly grasping moving objects

2002· article· en· W1493172977 on OpenAlexaff
M. Zhang, M. Buehler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryGRASPController (irrigation)Computer scienceRobotObject (grammar)Position (finance)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceAccelerationControl theory (sociology)Orientation (vector space)Robot end effectorTracking (education)Function (biology)Control (management)Mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Presents a new approach to online trajectory planning for target tracking, dynamic grasping and catching. The robot executes a geometric controller-it simply evaluates a nonlinear function which maps the currently measured position and velocity of the object to be grasped into a current desired robot pose. If the robot tracks these setpoints, it is guaranteed to match the object's velocity and acceleration on a specified grasp surface. The authors develop a geometric controller which specifies the full 6DOF position and orientation of the robot's end effector. A planar simulation demonstrates that this paradigm performs favorably when compared with the traditional planning approach. Since it does not depend on future object measurements, no object model is needed for trajectory prediction. Without trajectory prediction, the computational effort is drastically reduced, allowing for higher controller speed and tracking feedback gains. At the same time this approach provides a framework for general sensor based control of robotic tasks.>

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.170 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207