Tracking Control of a Closed-Chain Five-Bar Robot With Two Degrees of Freedom by Integration of an Approximation-Based Approach and Mechanical Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The trajectory tracking problem of a closed-chain five-bar robot is studied in this paper. Based on an error transformation function and the backstepping technique, an approximation-based tracking algorithm is proposed, which can guarantee the control performance of the robotic system in both the stable and transient phases. In particular, the overshoot, settling time, and final tracking error of the robotic system can be all adjusted by properly setting the parameters in the error transformation function. The radial basis function neural network (RBFNN) is used to compensate the complicated nonlinear terms in the closed-loop dynamics of the robotic system. The approximation error of the RBFNN is only required to be bounded, which simplifies the initial "trail-and-error" configuration of the neural network. Illustrative examples are given to verify the theoretical analysis and illustrate the effectiveness of the proposed algorithm. Finally, it is also shown that the proposed approximation-based controller can be simplified by a smart mechanical design of the closed-chain robot, which demonstrates the promise of the integrated design and control philosophy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".