Manipulation of Convex Objects via Two-agent Point-contact Push
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
This paper explores a sensorless manipulation method for orienting and translating convex objects in the plane. The manipulation task is performed by a two-agent point-contact push. During the manipulation, each agent makes a point contact with the object, and both agents push together along a straight-line. One advantage of the two-agent point-contact push over the physical fence based push is that the two-agent point-contact push can manipulate non-polygonal parts, and reduce the position and orientation uncertainties simultaneously. First, two manipulation primitives are identified, equilibrium and non-equilibrium pushes, and the motion of the object characterized under these two pushing actions. Then, a controllability analysis is conducted for this class of manipulation using the theory of positive bases. After the analysis, the planning problem is studied in the framework of a switched system, and an analytical solution to the planning problem is developed. Finally, manipulation examples and experiments are provided to demonstrate the proposed manipulation method.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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