MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978549926 · doi:10.1115/1.2098890

Recursive Kinematics and Inverse Dynamics for a Planar 3R Parallel Manipulator

2004· article· en· W1978549926 on OpenAlexaff
Waseem A. Khan, Venkat Krovi, Subir Kumar Saha, Jorge Angeles

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and Control · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModular designInverse kinematicsInverse dynamicsComputer scienceParallel manipulatorInverseKinematicsSelf-reconfiguring modular robotComputationPlanarOrthogonal complementFocus (optics)SimplicityTopology (electrical circuits)RobotAlgorithmControl theory (sociology)Theoretical computer scienceMathematicsArtificial intelligenceRobot controlMobile robotGeometryControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract We focus on the development of modular and recursive formulations for the inverse dynamics of parallel architecture manipulators in this paper. The modular formulation of mathematical models is attractive especially when existing sub-models may be assembled to create different topologies, e.g., cooperative robotic systems. Recursive algorithms are desirable from the viewpoint of simplicity and uniformity of computation. However, the prominent features of parallel architecture manipulators-the multiple closed kinematic loops, varying locations of actuation together with mixtures of active and passive joints-have traditionally hindered the formulation of modular and recursive algorithms. In this paper, the concept of the decoupled natural orthogonal complement (DeNOC) is combined with the spatial parallelism of the robots of interest to develop an inverse dynamics algorithm which is both recursive and modular. The various formulation stages in this process are highlighted using the illustrative example of a 3R Planar Parallel Manipulator.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.181 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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

Citations46
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Dynamic Systems Measurement and ControlSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207