MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2093039233 · doi:10.1115/detc2009-86551

Testbed of a Novel Robotic Pitch-Roll Wrist for Parameter Identification: Modeling and Analysis

2009· article· en· W2093039233 on OpenAlexafffund
Xiao Qing, Vikram Chopra, Jorge Angeles, Martin Asger Haugaard

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsTestbedStiffnessInertiaBevel gearComputer scienceSystem identificationWork (physics)BevelIdentification (biology)EngineeringControl theory (sociology)Mechanical engineeringControl engineeringStructural engineeringArtificial intelligencePhysicsAerospace engineeringData modeling

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The paper reports work in progress on the development of an innovative gearless pitch-roll wrist (PRW) for robotic applications. The PRW bears the morphology of a bevel-gear differential, its novelty lying in the absence of gears. Indeed, the PRW motivating this study is based on cams and rollers, intended to overcome the drawbacks of their bevel-gear counterparts—backlash, Coulomb friction and low stiffness. A testbed designed for parameter identification is introduced here. The paper discusses the mathematical modeling of the testbed, starting from its iconic model. The mathematical model is used to obtain the frequency response of the whole testbed, regarded as a multiple-input-multiple-output system, under the assumption that the parts of the spherical epicyclic train are rigid. The numerical values for the inertia parameters used in the model were taken from CAD models, those for stiffness and damping, as yet unknown, were estimated from a similar testbed reported elsewhere. The work ahead targets the experimental derivation of the Bode plots of the testbed, from which the numerical values of its inertia, stiffness and damping parameters are to be estimated. Moreover, having computed the stiffness and damping parameters of the testbed, the next step will be to drive the PRW at high frequencies, of the order of 1 kHz, to enable the identification of the stiffness and damping parameters of the PRW proper.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations1
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIterative Learning Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207