MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2010085093 · doi:10.1088/1748-3182/7/4/046016

Optimally efficient swimming in hyper-redundant mechanisms: control, design, and energy recovery

2012· article· en· W2010085093 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Wiens, Meyer Nahon

Bibliographic record

VenueBioinspiration & Biomimetics · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanisms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityMcGill University Health Centre
FundersChongqing University
KeywordsFish locomotionKinematicsPropulsionBiomimeticsProcess (computing)GaitRobotRange (aeronautics)Efficient energy useComputer scienceSimulationControl engineeringEngineeringControl theory (sociology)Control (management)Artificial intelligenceAerospace engineeringBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hyper-redundant mechanisms (HRMs), also known as snake-like robots, are highly adaptable during locomotion on land. Researchers are currently working to extend their capabilities to aquatic environments through biomimetic undulatory propulsion. In addition to increasing the versatility of the system, truly biomimetic swimming could also provide excellent locomotion efficiency. Unfortunately, the complexity of the system precludes the development of a functional solution to achieve this. To explore this problem, a rapid optimization process is used to generate efficient HRM swimming gaits. The low computational cost of the approach allows for multiple optimizations over a broad range of system conditions. By observing how these conditions affect optimal kinematics, a number of new insights are developed regarding undulatory swimming in robotic systems. Two key conditions are varied within the study, swimming speed and energy recovery. It is found that the swimmer mimics the speed control behaviour of natural fish and that energy recovery drastically increases the system's efficiency. Remarkably, this efficiency increase is accompanied by a distinct change in swimming kinematics. With energy recovery, the swimmer converges to a clearly anguilliform gait, without, it tends towards the carangiform mode.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.180 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations50
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioinspiration & BiomimeticsSame topicBiomimetic flight and propulsion mechanismsFrench-language works237,207