MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1965327285 · doi:10.1115/1.4002942

Projection-Based Control of Parallel Mechanisms

2011· article· en· W1965327285 on OpenAlexaff
Farhad Aghili

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Computational and Nonlinear Dynamics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCanadian Space Agency
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)ControllabilityActuatorController (irrigation)Projection (relational algebra)TorqueDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)Computer scienceParallel manipulatorBacklashControl engineeringMathematicsEngineeringControl (management)PhysicsArtificial intelligenceAlgorithmRobot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The unifying idea for most model-based control approaches for parallel mechanism is to derive a minimal-order dynamics model of the system and then design the corresponding controller. The problem with such a control approach is that the controller needs to change its structure whenever the mechanical system changes its number of degrees-of-freedom. This paper presents a projection-based control scheme for parallel mechanism that works whether the system is overactuated or not; it does not require derivation of the minimal-order dynamics model. Since the dimension of the projection matrix is fixed, the projection-based controller does not need to change its structure whenever the mechanical system changes its number of degrees-of-freedom. The controller also allows to specify lower and upper bounds on the actuator forces/torques, making it suitable not only for the control of parallel manipulators with limited force/torque capability of the actuators but also for backlash-free control of parallel manipulators as well as for control of tendon driven parallel manipulators. The stability of the projection-based controllers is rigourously proved, while the condition for the controllability of parallel manipulators is also derived in detail. Finally, experimental results obtained from a simple parallel mechanism, which changes its degrees-of-freedom, are appended. The results also demonstrate that the maximum actuator torque can be reduced by 20% if the actuator saturation is taken into account by the controller.

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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.365
Threshold uncertainty score0.309

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations5
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Computational and Nonlinear DynamicsSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207