MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1518976048 · doi:10.5772/5363

Topology and Geometry of Serial and Parallel Manipulators

2008· book-chapter· en· W1518976048 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiaoyu Wang, Luc Baro

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTopology (electrical circuits)Computer scienceGeometrySerial manipulatorGeometry and topologyMathematicsParallel manipulatorArtificial intelligenceCombinatoricsRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By introducing characteristic constraints, kinematic chains of serial and parallel manipulators can be better characterized. This is essential for both topology synthesis and geometry synthesis. On the one hand, topology synthesis of spatial manipulator is no longer dimension-independent; most of the topology syntheses are actually the search for some special geometric constraints which play a key role in determining the fundamental kinematic properties. On the other hand, it is necessary to identify the characteristic constraints when performing geometry synthesis in order for the design space to correspond appropriately to the manipulators having the intended kinematic properties. The graph structure of the proposed topological representation makes it possible to implement computer algorithms in order to perform systematic enumeration, comparison and classification of serial and parallel manipulators. The geometric representation is well adapted for computer aided simultaneous topological and geometric synthesis by introducing the concepts of initial configuration and the joint nature, making it possible to

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.172 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207