MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113646213 · doi:10.1109/cdc.1992.371781

Controllability of a system of two symmetric rigid bodies in three space

2005· article· en· W2113646213 on OpenAlexaff
Michael J. Enos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl and Dynamics of Mobile Robots
Canadian institutionsFields Institute for Research in Mathematical Sciences
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuaternionRigid bodyControllabilityCenter of mass (relativistic)Nonholonomic systemZero (linguistics)Position (finance)MathematicsMotion (physics)InertiaMathematical analysisPhysicsClassical mechanicsPure mathematicsGeometryComputer scienceApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Imposing the constraint that a mechanical system having two completely symmetric 3-D rigid bodies have zero total angular momentum, the angular velocities of these bodies are negatives of one another, and the transfer of this sytem from one position to another is nonholonomic. While Chow's theorem establishes the fixed-endpoint controllability of the system, this result does not explicitly exhibit any motions between a given set of endpoints. In the present work it is shown how to explicitly construct simple motions of this system on (0, 1) with arbitrary endpoints in SO(3)/sup 2/. In particular, using normalized quaternions to describe rotations, the author constructs, in terms of elementary functions, a continuous motion with the given endpoints; it consists of at most three successive motions during each of which the bodies rotate on fixed axes. It is assumed that the rigid bodies have coincident mass centers, that each has a completely symmetric mass distribution about its mass center, and that the inertia tensor of each body is the identity matrix.< <ETX xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink">&gt;</ETX>

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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score0.363

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.199 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicControl and Dynamics of Mobile RobotsFrench-language works237,207