MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051097686 · doi:10.1002/rob.20044

Design and prototype of parallel, wire‐actuated robots with a constraining linkage

2004· article· en· W2051097686 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Robotic Systems · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobotLinkage (software)WorkspaceStiffnessProcess (computing)Robot end effectorEngineeringPower consumptionRapid prototypingControl engineeringFinite element methodMechanical engineeringComputer sciencePower (physics)Artificial intelligenceStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Currently, wire‐actuated robots are not used extensively in industry, but they are gaining more attention due to advantages they possess. Low weight, cost, and power consumption are features that make wire‐controlled robots worth researching. This article investigates the designs of two different, 4 degrees of freedom parallel, wire‐actuated robots so that a prototype of one of these can be built. A design methodology is developed and presented. The process will be beneficial to those working on designing and prototyping a new robot or modifying an existing robot. Stability of both designs is considered first to ensure that the robots are able to exert and withstand end effector forces in different positions throughout their respective workspaces. The stiffness and strength of the materials used in the designs is also investigated using finite element analysis. © 2004 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

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 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.697
Threshold uncertainty score0.491

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.188 · 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