MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2063844760 · doi:10.1145/2766987

Biomechanical simulation and control of hands and tendinous systems

2015· article· en· W2063844760 on OpenAlexafffund
Prashant Sachdeva, Shinjiro Sueda, Susanne Bradley, Mikhail Fain, Dinesh K. Pai

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsPulleyDiscretizationQuasistatic processComputer scienceDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)Transverse planeSimulationControl theory (sociology)Control (management)Artificial intelligenceMechanical engineeringEngineeringPhysicsMathematicsStructural engineeringMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The tendons of the hand and other biomechanical systems form a complex network of sheaths, pulleys, and branches. By modeling these anatomical structures, we obtain realistic simulations of coordination and dynamics that were previously not possible. First, we introduce Eulerian-on-Lagrangian discretization of tendon strands, with a new selective quasistatic formulation that eliminates unnecessary degrees of freedom in the longitudinal direction, while maintaining the dynamic behavior in transverse directions. This formulation also allows us to take larger time steps. Second, we introduce two control methods for biomechanical systems: first, a general-purpose learning-based approach requiring no previous system knowledge, and a second approach using data extracted from the simulator. We use various examples to compare the performance of these controllers.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations41
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207