MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069346815 · doi:10.1115/detc2010-28383

The Dimensional Synthesis of the Linear Delta Robot for a Force-Feedback Device

2010· article· en· W2069346815 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Cardou, Denis Laurendeau, Luc Beaulieu, Luc Be ́langer, Alexandre Carette

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkspaceKinematicsControl theory (sociology)Sensitivity (control systems)DiscretizationComputer scienceRobotMathematicsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPhysicsMathematical analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We perform the dimensional synthesis of a parallel manipulator to be used as a force-feedback device in a virtual reality application for surgeon training in prostate brachytherapy. For such brachytherapy operations, the characteristics of the required workspace point towards the architecture of the linear DELTA robot to be used as the force-feedback device to the surgeon. In this paper, we address the dimensional synthesis of the linear DELTA robot for the prescribed workspace. To this end, we propose the minimum relative kinematic sensitivity as an objective function, a kinematic performance index that is different from most of the commonly used metrics, i.e., manipulability and dexterity. The minimum relative kinematic sensitivity represents the ratio of the minimum to the maximum effect of a unity-bounded set of actuator displacements on the moving-platform pose. These extremum sensitivities are computed independently over the prescribed workspace. Thence, the dimensional synthesis problem consists in finding the robot dimensions that maximize the minimum relative kinematic sensitivity, so it is guaranteed within a narrow interval over the prescribed workspace. This optimization problem is nonconvex, which poses a challenge from the computational point of view. However, because of symmetry in the mechanism and other simplifications, the number of optimization variables is reduced to four. This allows a reasonably fine discretization of the search domain, giving the designers confidence that the ensuing local optimum is close to the global optimum.

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.199 · 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207