Experimental Identification and Analysis of the Dynamics of a PHANToM Premium 1.5A Haptic Device
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
The dynamics of a PHANToM Premium 1.5A haptic device from SensAble Technologies, Inc. is experimentally identified and analyzed for different installations of the device and its accessories, such as the typical upright, upside down, with gimbal and counterbalance weight, and with force sensor. 1 An earlier formulation of the robot dynamic model is augmented with a friction model, linearly parameterized, and experimentally identified using least squares. The identified dynamics are experimentally evaluated with an inverse dynamics controller and verified by comparing user hand force estimates with the measured values. The contribution of different dynamic terms such as inertial, Coriolis and centrifugal, gravitational, and Coulomb and viscous friction are demonstrated and discussed. The identified model can be used for a variety of haptic applications, such as hand force estimation, accurate active gravity compensation and counterbalance weight determination for various installation conditions, and model-based control for haptic simulation and teleoperation.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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