MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038323858 · doi:10.1115/1.4000639

Module-Based Static Structural Design of a Modular Reconfigurable Robot

2009· article· en· W2038323858 on OpenAlexaff
Richard Phillip Mohamed, Fengfeng Xi, Allan Daniel Finistauri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mechanical Design · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModular designRobotPayload (computing)Computer scienceConfiguration designControl engineeringDesign processDeflection (physics)Process (computing)Frame (networking)EngineeringControl theory (sociology)Artificial intelligenceWork in processMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the structural design of modular reconfigurable robots (MRRs) is studied. This problem is defined as the determination of proper module sizes according to the robot’s payload and end-effector deflection specifications. Because an MRR has multiple configurations, a simple design process is proposed in order to avoid performing the structural design stage at each configuration. The final structural design is only carried out at a single configuration that can guarantee the robot’s satisfactory performance for all remaining feasible configurations. It is shown that the module structural design stage can be performed at the local coordinate frame of each module. While the module local force requirement can be fully determined, the determination of the module local deformation requirement is redundant. Thus, there can exist multiple design solutions. To overcome this problem, a nonlinear approach using a genetic algorithm is used to search for an optimal solution. Finally, a design simulation is performed on an example MRR, and the results show the effectiveness of the proposed design 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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations20
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mechanical DesignSame topicModular Robots and Swarm IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207