MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2067038916 · doi:10.1002/rob.1031

Causal approximate inversion for control of structurally flexible manipulators using nonlinear inner–outer factorization

2001· article· en· W2067038916 on OpenAlexaff
Andrew Cree, Christopher J. Damaren

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Robotic Systems · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)FactorizationNonlinear systemMathematicsInverse dynamicsInverseRiccati equationComputer scienceMathematical analysisAlgorithmControl (management)Differential equationGeometryClassical mechanicsArtificial intelligenceKinematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A control scheme for flexible‐link manipulators is advanced which is based on the notion of nonlinear inner–outer factorization. It is well known that the inverse of the forward dynamics map from joint torques to manipulator tip motion is noncausal and cannot be implemented in conjunction with real‐time path planning. The methods used here determine causal approximations for the inverse dynamics using the inverse of the outer (stable and minimum phase) factor and a static approximation for the inverse of the inner (lossless but nonminimum phase) factor. The Hamilton–Jacobi equation that arises is approximated by a state‐dependent Riccati equation at each time step. The factorization procedure yields the corresponding joint trajectories which can serve as reference trajectories for closing joint‐based feedback loops. Experimental results from a planar three‐link manipulator with two flexible links demonstrate the efficacy of the procedure. © 2001 John Wiley & Sons, 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.

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)0.001
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.230
Teacher spread0.211 · 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

Citations5
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Robotic SystemsSame topicDynamics and Control of Mechanical SystemsFrench-language works237,207