Identification of Contact Dynamics Model Parameters From Constrained Robotic Operations
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
With the fast advances in computing technology, contact dynamics simulations are playing a more important role in the design, verification, and operation support of space systems. The validity of computer simulation depends not only on the underlying mathematical models but also on the model parameters. This paper describes a novel strategy of identifying contact dynamics parameters based on the sensor data collected from a robot performing contact tasks. Unlike existing identification algorithms, this methodology is applicable to complex contact geometries where contact between mating objects occurs at multiple surface areas in a time-variant fashion. At the same time, the procedure requires only measurements of end-effector forces/moments and the kinematics information for the end-effector and the environment. Similarly to other methods, the solution is formulated as a linear identification problem, which can be solved with standard numerical techniques for overdetermined systems. Efficacy, precision, and sensitivity of the identification methodology are investigated in simulation with two examples: A cube sliding in a wedge and a payload/fixture combination modeled after a real space-manipulator task.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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