MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2084817372 · doi:10.1109/cdc.2012.6426356

Extension of Zeheb-Walach absolute stability criteria for robot-human interactions

2012· article· en· W2084817372 on OpenAlexafffund
Kamran Razi, Keyvan Hashtrudi-Zaad

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicTeleoperation and Haptic Systems
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsStability (learning theory)Control theory (sociology)Operator (biology)Position (finance)TeleoperationRobotComputer scienceRepresentation (politics)MathematicsControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The notion of absolute stability has been used to analyze the stability of man-machine interfaces in which a human operator commands a robot to do a task in a real or simulated environment. In this paper, we present and prove an extended version of the Zeheb-Walach absolute stability theorem that can be applied to n-port networks with “simple imaginary poles”. Conditions on the Laurent expansion of the elements and the principal minors of the impedance matrix are added to the theorem and the proof is conducted using the zero set of multiparameter functions. The unique feature of the proposed method is the graphical representation of the loci of the roots of the system, which allows for studying the effect of various system and control parameters on stability margins. To demonstrate the applicability of the new theorem, the stability of a position-position controlled teleoperation system, modeled by a 2-port network, coupled with the passive impedances of the human operator's hand, and the environment, is investigated.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.083
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTeleoperation and Haptic SystemsFrench-language works237,207