MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2045861766 · doi:10.1243/0954406011520670

Mechatronics design for a programmable closed-loop mechanism

2001· article· en· W2045861766 on OpenAlexafffund
Wenjun Zhang, Daniel Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering Science · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Saskatchewan
KeywordsMechatronicsControl theory (sociology)Control engineeringTorqueComputer scienceRedistribution (election)StiffnessEngineeringMechanism (biology)Controller (irrigation)Control (management)Artificial intelligenceStructural engineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the demand increases for machines with high accuracy, high speed and high stiffness, programmable closed-loop linkages (PCLL) emerge. This paper presents further results obtained from a study of the mechatronics design approach to PCLL systems proposed by the authors elsewhere. In this approach, the system performances such as motion tracking and torque fluctuation are further improved after a suitable design of mass redistribution. In the present paper it is shown that a scheme called negative mass redistribution, which follows the principle of shaking force/shaking moment balancing, can achieve an excellent improvement in system performance. Furthermore, simultaneous variation in the length of the link and the gain of the PD controller is studied, which shows promise for further improvement in system performance. In general, these studies have shown that complex control algorithms may not achieve a better result than that achieved by a simple PD controller combined with a mass redistribution scheme.

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)0.001
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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.212 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part C Journal of Mechanical Engineering ScienceSame topicIterative Learning Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207