Workspace Analysis of Multibody Cable-Driven Mechanisms
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A systematic approach is proposed to determine the tensionable workspace of multibody cable-driven mechanisms. The method is also capable of finding analytical descriptions for the boundaries of the tensionable regions for any number of redundant cables used. The presented approach builds upon the available methods for conventional (rigid body) cable-driven mechanisms, i.e., null space analysis and supporting/separating hyperplanes. It extends these methods to the case of a multibody driven by cables. For this purpose, the notion of generalized forces and Lagrange’s method is used to eliminate the constraint forces/moments from the equilibrium equations. This has resulted in a more compact equation form with fewer unknowns. The method is then applied to several one- and two-DOF mechanisms with various cable distributions. Analytical descriptions for the boundaries of their workspaces are found. These boundaries and the resulting regions are then used to improve the design for larger tensionable workspaces.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it