MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2052017007 · doi:10.2514/6.2004-5325

Optimal Fuzzy Logic Controller for a Flexible Robot

2004· article· en· W2052017007 on OpenAlexaff
Anthony R. Green, Jurek Z. Sąsiadek

Bibliographic record

VenueAIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and Exhibit · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Fuzzy logicInverse dynamicsJacobian matrix and determinantController (irrigation)Nonlinear systemRobotComputer scienceMathematicsKinematicsControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

†Operational problems with robot manipulators in space relate to several factors, one most importantly being structural flexibility and subsequently significant difficulties with the control systems, especially, for position control. This paper presents a comparison of fuzzy logic system (FLS) controllers to determine an optimal design for tracking the endpoint of a two-link flexible robot. The dominant assumed mode of vibration for an EulerBernoulli cantilever beam is coupled with the nonlinear dynamics for rigid links to form an Euler-Lagrange inverse flexible dynamics robot model. A Jacobian transpose control law is adapted by a FLS with link deformation inputs and a single variable output. Simulation results for three, five, seven and nine triangular and Gaussian membership functions are compared to identify an optimal design for best tracking control and least computation time. Results show the optimal choice of FLS is three triangular membership functions at 14 min 51 sec tracking time.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.224
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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAIAA Guidance, Navigation, and Control Conference and ExhibitSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207