MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2069949672 · doi:10.1155/2010/186203

Kinetostatic and Inertial Conditioning of the McGill Schönflies-Motion Generator

2010· article· en· W2069949672 on OpenAlexaffabout
Alessandro Cammarata, Jorge Angeles, Rosario Sinatra

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Mechanical Engineering · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsJacobian matrix and determinantControl theory (sociology)Inertial frame of referenceGenerator (circuit theory)InertiaConditioningTrajectoryMotion (physics)Computer scienceRobotMatrix (chemical analysis)Control engineeringMathematicsEngineeringArtificial intelligencePower (physics)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper focuses on the optimization of the McGill Schönflies Motion Generator. Recent trends on optimum design of parallel robots led us to investigate the advantages and disadvantages derived from an optimization based on performance indices. Particularly, we optimize here two different indices: the kinematic conditioning and the inertial conditioning, pertaining to the condition number of the Jacobian matrix and to that of the generalized inertia matrix of the robot, respectively. The problem of finding the characteristic length for the robot is first investigated by means of a constrained optimization problem; then plots of the kinetostatic and the inertial conditioning indices are provided for a particular trajectory to be tracked by the moving platform of the SMG. Deep connections appear between the two indices, reflecting a correlation between kinematics and dynamics.

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 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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.538
Threshold uncertainty score0.400

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Mechanical EngineeringSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207