MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092499874 · doi:10.1002/rob.10083

Pose Optimization of Serial Manipulators Using Knowledge of Their Velocity‐Degenerate (Singular) Configurations

2003· article· en· W2092499874 on OpenAlexafffund
Scott Nokleby, Ron P. Podhorodeski

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Robotic Systems · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDegenerate energy levelsSerial manipulatorControl theory (sociology)Computer scienceControl engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringPhysicsRobotControl (management)Parallel manipulator

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This work investigates the exploitation of velocity‐degenerate configurations to optimize the pose of either nonredundant or redundant serial manipulators to sustain desired wrenches. An algorithm is developed that determines a desirable start point for the optimization of a serial manipulator's pose. The start‐point algorithm (SPA) uses analytical expressions of the velocity‐degenerate (singular) configurations of a serial manipulator to determine a pose that would be best suitable to sustain a desired wrench. Results for an example redundant serial manipulator are presented. The example results show that by using the SPA with the optimization routine, the resulting poses obtained require less effort from the actuators when compared to the poses obtained without using the SPA. It is shown that when no constraint is imposed on the position of the end‐effector, the SPA excels at providing a better solution with less iterations than running the optimization without the SPA. © 2003 Wiley Periodicals, 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: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
GenreMethods

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
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Robotic SystemsSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207