MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1968371478 · doi:10.1017/s026357470100337x

Calibration-based absolute localization of parts for multi-robot assembly

2002· article· en· W1968371478 on OpenAlexaff
Edward J. Park, Xu Weihua, James K. Mills

Bibliographic record

VenueRobotica · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotCalibrationComputer visionRobot calibrationOrientation (vector space)Artificial intelligencePosition (finance)Reference frameGRASPPoseFrame (networking)Computer scienceFrame of referenceAutomotive industryRobot kinematicsEngineeringSimulationMobile robotMathematicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In multi-robot assembly of parts, for successful mating, the grasped parts must be located with sufficiently small position and orientation errors so that assembly can be achieved. This paper describes a new approach for determining the absolute three-dimensional spatial location of parts grasped by robots during assembly. Through a combination of robot pose calibration and part-sensor calibration, the robot, used to grasp the part, is calibrated to accurately position and orient parts to a designated mating location. First, by employing a robot pose measurement system, the 6 DOF robot pose errors relative to a reference coordinate frame are compensated. Second, with the implementation of a part pose measurement, the 6 DOF part pose errors, relative to the robot tool frame, are estimated in real time. An experimental verification of the proposed methodology using a single FANUC S–110 robot manipulating an automotive sheet metal part is described.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.191 · 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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoboticaSame topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207