MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2087432363 · doi:10.1109/icma.2012.6283179

Wawa: A tumbler-like household robot

2012· article· en· W2087432363 on OpenAlexaff
Zhiguang Xiao, Manjia Su, Yisheng Guan, Hong Zhang, Qifeng Yan, Zhimi Wang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSocial Robot Interaction and HRI
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSwingRobotMechatronicsComputer scienceEntertainmentFace (sociological concept)TrajectoryArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Computer visionPosition (finance)SimulationControl engineeringEngineeringSociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Household robots are widely popular with families for their interestingness. Based on the principle of tumbler, we have developed a novel household robot named Wawa (in the meaning of baby). This robot can be used for entertainment, home decoration, call alert, assisted play and so on. Usually a tumbler can only keep stability in the vertical direction and its swing is uncontrollable. With simple mechanical structure and concise control system, Wawa can be stable in any posture and can swing as desired. It thus can achieve two actions, which are dancing - regularly swing in predetermined trajectory, and face tracking - properly swing according to the position of the observers' face. Experiments are provided to show the features and functions of the cute robot. The mechanical system, control system and motion planning are presented in this paper to show how robotic toy can be developed based on traditional toy with mechatronic technique.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.119
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designBench or experimental
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Robot Interaction and HRIFrench-language works237,207