Comparison of PD-Based Controllers for Robotic Manipulators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PD control is widely used in industrial robotic manipulators because of its simple structure and acceptable performance. In this paper, the PD-based control schemes for the trajectory tracking of the robotic manipulators are addressed. The fixed gain PD control, the nonlinear gain PD (NPD) control, the adaptive PD learning control (PD-LC), and the adaptive NPD learning control (NPD-LC) are applied for the trajectory tracking of both serial and parallel robotic manipulators. The PD-LC and NPD-LC controllers can be used to improve the tracking performance for the repeatable tracking tasks in an iterative mode. The PD-LC and NPD-LC consists of a PD/NPD control as the basic feedback control and an additional feedforward control term directly inherited from the previous iteration of the same control task. A comparative study of four PD-based controllers is conducted to understand how different control schemes will affect the trajectory tracking performance, and the results are shown in this paper. Case studies are presented to demonstrate the validity of the PD-LC and NPD-LC algorithms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".