MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1874655302 · doi:10.1109/isic.1991.187358

Intelligent re-location based manipulation of objects using robot hands. I. Extracting qualitative abstracts from quantitative concepts

2002· article· en· W1874655302 on OpenAlexaff
S.P. Ananthanarayanan, A.A. Goldenberg, John Mylopoulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicAI-based Problem Solving and Planning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQualitative reasoningArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceRobotContext (archaeology)Object (grammar)Orientation (vector space)Transformation (genetics)Human–computer interactionQualitative analysisCommonsense reasoningQualitative researchComputer visionMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors discuss the relevant qualitative modeling issues that need to be addressed while developing a framework suitable for intelligent dexterous manipulation of objects using a robot hand, based on common-sense reasoning. Relevant qualitative concepts are abstracted from the existing analytical model of a robot grasping situation and suitably aggregated according to their functional interrelationships. The concepts of qualitative vectors, qualitative reference frames, qualitative planes, qualitative forces and qualitative displacements are defined in the context of robot grasping and dexterous manipulation. An incremental change in the orientation of a grasped object is modeled using a qualitative rotational transformation.>

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)0.003
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 score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0020.002
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 head0.203
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningFrench-language works237,207