MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2039775880 · doi:10.1115/imece2003-43103

Modeling of a Flexible Link in Contact: Strain vs. Force Output

2003· article· en· W2039775880 on OpenAlexaff
K. Ziaei, D. W. L. Wang, G. R. Heppler

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)TorqueTransfer functionLink (geometry)Function (biology)Contact forceComputer sciencePhase (matter)Control engineeringEngineeringControl (management)PhysicsClassical mechanicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many control design techniques for force control of flexible link manipulators, require an adequate transfer function model of the manipulator in contact. In this paper we derive a simple transfer function model for a single flexible link in contact with stiff environment. While the transfer function from input torque to contact force is nonminimum phase, we show that the transfer function from input torque to strain results in a minimum phase transfer function and thus, it provides an attractive, alternative output for force control of flexible link manipulators. Experimental results verify the validity of the presented models.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.300

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 head0.206
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207