MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1997047708 · doi:10.1115/1.3046139

Type Synthesis ofLinkage-Driven Self-Adaptive Fingers

2009· article· en· W1997047708 on OpenAlexaff
Lionel Birglen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mechanisms and Robotics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLinkage (software)KinematicsComputer scienceControl engineeringArtificial intelligenceElectronicsRoboticsRobotEngineeringElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper aims at providing a method to synthesize mechanical architectures of self-adaptive robotic fingers driven by linkages. Self-adaptive mechanisms are used in robotic fingers to provide the latter with the ability to adjust themselves to the shape of the object seized without any dedicated electronics, sensor, or control. This type of mechanisms has been known for centuries but the increased capabilities of digital systems have kept them in the shadows. Recently, because of the lack of commercial and industrial success of complex robotic hands, self-adaptive mechanisms have attracted much more interest from the research community and several prototypes have been built. Nevertheless, only a handful of prototypes are currently known. It is the aim of this paper to present a methodology that is able to generate thousands of self-adaptive robotic fingers driven by linkages with two and three phalanges. First, potential kinematic architectures are synthesized using a well-known technique. Second, the issue of proper actuation and passive element(s) selection and location is addressed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations40
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mechanisms and RoboticsSame topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207