Singularity Equations of Gough–Stewart Platforms Using a Minimal Set of Geometric Parameters
Bibliographic record
Abstract
So far, in the derivation of the singularity equations of Gough–Stewart platforms, all researchers defined the mobile frame by making its origin coincide with the considered point on the platform. One problem can be that the obtained singularity equation contains too many geometric parameters and is not convenient for singularity analysis, especially not convenient for geometric optimization. Another problem can be that the obtained singularity equation cannot be used directly in practice. To solve these problems, this work presents a new approach to derive the singularity equation of the Gough–Stewart platform. The main point is that the origin of the mobile frame is separated from the considered point and chosen to coincide with a special point on the platform in order to minimize the geometric parameters defining the platform. Similarly, by defining a proper fixed frame, the geometric parameters defining the base can also be minimized. In this way, no matter which practical point of the platform is chosen as the considered point, the obtained singularity equation contains only a minimal set of geometric parameters and becomes a solid foundation for the geometric optimization based on singularity analysis.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".