MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1926347822 · doi:10.1109/robot.1992.220162

Analysis of force control based on linear models

2003· article· en· W1926347822 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTask (project management)Similarity (geometry)Stability (learning theory)Computer sciencePoint (geometry)State spaceCompensation (psychology)Control theory (sociology)Variable (mathematics)RobotSoftwareLinear modelSelection (genetic algorithm)Matrix similarityJoint (building)Control (management)Artificial intelligenceMathematicsMachine learningEngineeringProgramming languageMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author addresses force control of robot manipulators. It is shown that from a linear system point of view the methods proposed in the literature are equivalent to state an/for output variable feedback, and the stability, for measurement performed either in joint or task space coordinates, can be established through similarity transformations. However, when selection matrices are used, the stability is affected by the choice of compensation in terms of task or joint space coordinates. Using linear models, it is argued that many different methods are analytically equivalent, hence the suggested improvements are inconclusive unless considerations of hardware-, software-, and equipment-specific data are taken into account.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Quick stats

Citations17
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207