MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990945312 · doi:10.1115/imece2004-61361

Micro-Guidance of Pick-and-Place Robots via Task-Space Sensing

2004· article· en· W1990945312 on OpenAlexaff
Goldie Nejat, B. Benhabib

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobot end effectorComputer scienceNoveltyNoise (video)RobotPlanarTask (project management)SMT placement equipmentComputer visionArtificial intelligenceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a line-of-sight-sensing based guidance methodology is proposed for the localization of robotic end-effectors in high-precision (i.e., micron or sub-micron accuracy) pick-and-place applications. The novelty of the overall system is its applicability to cases that do not allow for the direct proximity measurement of the end-effector’s pose. The proposed iterative guidance algorithm utilizes a pseudo-PD function to minimize the systematic errors of the end-effector, while allowing the pose of the end-effector to converge within the random noise limits. The system has been experimentally tested for a three-dof 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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.208 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Measurement and Metrology TechniquesFrench-language works237,207