MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2054120788 · doi:10.1115/1.2114890

Stiffness of Cable-based Parallel Manipulators With Application to Stability Analysis

2005· article· en· W2054120788 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 Mechanical Design · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStiffnessControl theory (sociology)Manipulator (device)Parallel manipulatorInstabilityRobotTension (geology)Robot manipulatorPlanarStability (learning theory)Structural engineeringTrajectoryEngineeringComputer scienceControl (management)PhysicsMechanicsClassical mechanicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The stiffness of cable-based robots is studied in this paper. Since antagonistic forces are essential for the operation of cable-based manipulators, their effects on the stiffness should be considered in the design, control, and trajectory planning of these manipulators. This paper studies this issue and derives the conditions under which a cable-based manipulator may become unstable because of the antagonistic forces. For this purpose, a new approach is introduced to calculate the total stiffness matrix. This approach shows that, for a cable-based manipulator with all cables in tension, the root of instability is a rotational stiffness caused by the internal cable forces. A set of sufficient conditions are derived to ensure the manipulator is stabilizable meaning that it never becomes unstable upon increasing the antagonistic forces. Stabilizability of a planar cable-based manipulator is studied as an example to illustrate this approach.

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)0.001
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 score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.423

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.206 · 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