MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022975181 · doi:10.1115/detc2004-57127

On the Properties and the Determination of the Wrench-Closure Workspace of Planar Parallel Cable-Driven Mechanisms

2004· article· en· W2022975181 on OpenAlexaff
Marc Gouttefarde, Clément Gosselin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWrenchWorkspaceOrientation (vector space)Constant (computer programming)PlanarClosure (psychology)Boundary (topology)Computer sciencePlane (geometry)Representation (politics)Control theory (sociology)Topology (electrical circuits)GeometryMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMechanical engineeringRobotEngineeringMathematical analysisComputer graphics (images)CombinatoricsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a detailed analysis of the constant-orientation wrench-closure workspace of planar three-degree-of-freedom parallel mechanisms driven by four cables. The constant-orientation wrench-closure workspace is defined as the subset of the plane wherein, for a given orientation of the moving platform, any planar wrench applied on the moving platform can be balanced by the cable-driven mechanism. Based on mathematical observations, this workspace is proved to be the union of two disconnected sets that may or may not exist. Moreover, if the constant-orientation wrench-closure workspace (WCW) exists, its boundary is shown to be composed of portions of conic sections. Then, an algorithm that determines the constant-orientation wrench-closure workspace by means of a graphical representation of its boundary is introduced. Several examples are also included.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.915
Threshold uncertainty score0.142

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.167
Teacher spread0.155 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations44
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207