MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965167541 · doi:10.1115/1.2827455

A Constrained Lagrange Formulation of Multilink Planar Flexible Manipulator

2008· article· en· W1965167541 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of vibration and acoustics · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsJacobian matrix and determinantRevolute jointGeneralized coordinatesLagrange multiplierMathematicsNonlinear systemControl theory (sociology)Equations of motionMathematical analysisConstraint algorithmFinite element methodVibrationPlanarApplied mathematicsConstraint (computer-aided design)Computer scienceMathematical optimizationClassical mechanicsPhysicsGeometryStructural engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, the closed-form dynamic equations of planar flexible link manipulators (FLMs), with revolute joints and constant cross sections, are derived combining Lagrange’s equations and the assumed mode shape method. To overcome the lengthy and complicated derivative calculation of the Lagrangian function of a FLM, these computations are done only once for a single flexible link manipulator with a moving base (SFLMB). Employing the Lagrange multipliers and the dynamic equations of the SFLMB, the equations of motion of the FLM are derived in terms of the dependent generalized coordinates. To obtain the closed-form dynamic equations of the FLM in terms of the independent generalized coordinates, the natural orthogonal complement of the Jacobian constraint matrix, which is associated with the velocity constraints in the linear homogeneous form, is used. To verify the proposed closed-form dynamic model, the simulation results obtained from the model were compared with the results of the full nonlinear finite element analysis. These comparisons showed sound agreement. One of the main advantages of this approach is that the derived dynamic model can be used for the model based end-effector control and the vibration suppression of planar FLMs.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score0.190

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.198 · 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