MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1595981762 · doi:10.1109/icra.2015.7139001

Magneto-Rheological actuators for haptic devices: Design, modeling, control, and validation of a prototype clutch

2015· article· en· W1595981762 on OpenAlexaff
Nima Najmaei, Ali Asadian, Mehrdad R. Kermani, Rajni V. Patel

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElevator Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClutchHaptic technologyActuatorTorqueComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)Control engineeringMagnetorheological fluidSimulationEngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Mechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In our previous work [1], the potential benefits of Magneto-Rheological Fluid based actuators to the field of haptics were studied. Our results showed that the superior mechanical attributes of such actuators contribute to improvement of stability and transparency in haptic devices. To this end, a novel design of a small-scale MRF-based clutch, was proposed in [1]. This paper reports on the development and validation of the proposed MRF-based clutch. In addition, a closed-loop torque control strategy is presented. The feedback signal used in this control scheme comes from the magnetic field measurement and is used to compensate for the nonlinear behavior using an estimated model, based on Artificial Neural Networks (ANNs). Such a control strategy eliminates the need for torque sensors for providing feedback signals. The performance of the developed design and the effectiveness of the proposed modeling and control techniques are experimentally validated. The results clearly demonstrate that the clutch shows great potential for use in a multiple degrees-of-freedom (DOF) haptic interface for a class of medical applications.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.200 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations15
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicElevator Systems and ControlFrench-language works237,207