MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1979210187 · doi:10.1177/0954406212437296

Truncation errors of assumed shape modeling for flexible-link manipulators

2012· article· en· W1979210187 on OpenAlexaff
Fatemeh Heidari, M. Vakil, Reza Fotouhi, P.N. Nikiforuk

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)MathematicsTruncation (statistics)Link (geometry)Displacement (psychology)Mode (computer interface)Transfer functionApplied mathematicsComputer scienceControl (management)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The assumed mode shape method has been widely used to derive finite degree-of-freedom dynamic models for flexible-link manipulators, which theoretically have infinite degree-of-freedom dynamics. For a single flexible manipulator, this approximation changes locations of the zeros of transfer functions between base torque and end-effector displacement. The change in locations of zeros considerably affects accuracy of the model and therefore the performance of model-based controllers. This article presents a comprehensive study on the change in locations of zeros due to the truncation associated with assumed mode shape method. It is shown that the locations of approximate zeros depend on four non-dimensional parameters, whereas the locations of analytical zeros depend on only two non-dimensional parameters. Approximate zeros are obtained from assumed mode shape method models, whereas analytical zeros are derived from infinite order models. A thorough study of the differences between approximate zeros and analytical zeros versus the number of mode shapes as well as all the physical parameters is performed. Moreover, guidelines are provided to select the numbers of mode shapes such that the approximate zeros become close to the analytical zeros. These guidelines can easily be used by control and modeling engineers, making them valuable for modeling and control of flexible robot manipulators.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.990

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering ScienceSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207