MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055682098 · doi:10.1115/detc2006-99398

Case Study in Biomimetic Design: Handling and Assembly of Microparts

2006· article· en· W2055682098 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicModular Robots and Swarm Intelligence
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiomimeticsComputer scienceManufacturing engineeringNanotechnologyEngineeringMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the application of the biomimetic design process to the development of automated gripping devices for microparts. Handling and assembly of micromechanical parts is complicated by size effects that occur when part dimensions are scaled down. A common complication involves sticking between the gripping device and the micropart, which hinders the automation of picking and releasing operations. This paper presents the identification and use of biological analogies to solve the problem of sticking during microassembly. Selected release techniques based on DNA transcription and the abscission process in plants inspired concepts of new automated handling devices for microobjects. The design, development and testing of a gripping device, based on biological principles, for the automated handling and assembly of a microscrew is presented.Copyright © 2006 by ASME

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.340
Threshold uncertainty score0.234

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.245
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

Quick stats

Citations35
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicModular Robots and Swarm IntelligenceFrench-language works237,207