MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1629403029 · doi:10.1109/iros.1996.571077

A vision based online motion planning of robot manipulators

2002· article· en· W1629403029 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew K. C. Wong, René V. Mayorga, Aiqiong Rong, Xiaohong Liang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotics and Sensor-Based Localization
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMotion planningObstacle avoidanceRobotObstacleRedundancy (engineering)Mobile robot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article presents a vision based online system for the robust trajectory planning of robot manipulators. It uses a 3D vision system to determine the relative position of the objects to be engaged and the obstacle to avoid, and a novel obstacle avoidance procedure for manipulator motion planning. From intensity images acquired by a CCD camera mounted on the robot arm, the salient features are first accurately and robustly detected and then grouped. Through the correspondences between the feature groupings and the model features, the 3D poses of the objects and the obstacles are determined and confirmed by back-projection. Once these poses are determined, an online procedure, based on redundancy resolution, is used to achieve obstacle avoidance. The approach utilizes a null space vector to set properly the robot configuration, and a potential field method to guide the end-effector. By pseudoinverse perturbation it also prevents singular configurations and local minima. The feasibility and effectiveness of the system is demonstrated by an experiment with online engagement and transportation of objects posed inside an aluminium frame.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.201 · 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

Citations12
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotics and Sensor-Based LocalizationFrench-language works237,207