MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101798901 · doi:10.1115/detc2010-28227

Trajectory Control for an Innovative Rapid Freeze Prototyping System

2010· article· en· W2101798901 on OpenAlexaff
Eric Barnett, Jorge Angeles, Damiano Pasini, Pieter Sijpkes

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrajectoryComputer scienceTrajectory optimizationScheme (mathematics)RobotSCARARapid prototypingControl systemControl engineeringProgramming by demonstrationControl logicControl (management)SimulationEngineeringProgramming languageArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The subject of this paper is trajectory control for an Adept Cobra 600 robot, which has been retrofitted for additive ice construction. Since this application is quite different from typical SCARA applications, considerable development is needed for trajectory control and data flow. We first outline the trajectory control system requirements, as well as the limitations of the robot hardware. Different control options are proposed and their merits and demerits are discussed; the most suitable scheme is judged to be custom programming in Adept’s V+ programming language, with trajectories expressed in the Cobra 600 joint space. With this control scheme, all system requirements are met, data manipulation is most efficient, and the system is readily adaptable for planned modifications. A specific data format is needed in order to implement this control scheme; we describe how trajectory data produced with our part-slicing algorithm is converted to the format required for the V+ programs.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.503

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207