Workspace Computation and Analysis of a Planar 2-DoF Translational Tensegrity Mechanism
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
Tensegrity mechanisms are interesting candidates for high-acceleration robotic applications since their use of cables allows for a reduction in the weight and inertia of their mobile parts. In this work, a planar two-degree-of-freedom translational tensegrity mechanism that could be used for pick and place applications is introduced. The mechanism uses a strategic actuation scheme to generate the translational motion as well as to ensure that the cables remain taut at all times. Analytical solutions to the direct and inverse kinematic problems are developed and the mechanism’s workspace boundaries are computed in both the actuator and Cartesian spaces. The influence of the mechanism’s geometry on the size and shape of the Cartesian workspace are then studied. Based on workspace size only, it is found that the optimal mechanism geometry corresponds to a relatively large ratio between the length of the struts and the width of the base and end-effector.
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