MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993201813 · doi:10.1177/02783640022066923

Dynamics of a Mobile Robot with Three Ball-Wheels

2000· article· en· W1993201813 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe International Journal of Robotics Research · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl and Dynamics of Mobile Robots
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBall (mathematics)KinematicsActuatorControl theory (sociology)HolonomicHolonomyInertial frame of referenceMobile robotOrientation (vector space)RobotEngineeringComputer scienceControl engineeringClassical mechanicsMathematicsPhysicsGeometryArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysisControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A mathematical model is developed for a mobile robot with three ball-wheels. The resulting model turns out to be a Chaplygin system, which allows the dynamics equations and the kinematic constraints to be integrated separately. The system is driven by six actuators: one actuator connected to one roller of each wheel, and three more actuators controlling the orientation of the ball-carriers with respect to the platform. Analysis of the mathematical model of this system using the holonomy matrix yields conditions under which the system can be rendered holonomic. Holonomy can be achieved by keeping the ball-carriers in pure translational motion. Therefore, the control of the system can be simplified by imposing constraints on the ball-carriers that prevent them from changing their orientation with respect to an inertial frame.

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.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.253
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.274 · 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