A digital implementation of the acceleration feedback control law on a PUMA 560 manipulator
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A design procedure that shows how the acceleration feedback control law, with the frequency weighting compensator, can be implemented digitally, requiring only position data as input, is presented. The design procedure was applied to the shoulder joint of a PUMA 560 manipulator. It was demonstrated that the major limitations on the performance of this control law are due to the design of the robot itself. These limitations arise from friction in the mechanical transmission, structural resonances, and low actuator saturation thresholds in the PUMA 560. It is shown that the acceleration feedback control law can achieve improvement in tracking while using a slightly less energetic control action, in comparison to a similarly tuned proportional plus derivative controller. Tuning of the modified acceleration feedback control law entails selecting the appropriate saturation limits for clipping the numerical differentiators. High frequency uncertainty constrains how high these saturation limits may be set.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">></ETX>
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it