MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113860323 · doi:10.1109/robot.2007.363784

Simplectic Architectures for True Multi-axial Accelerometers: A Novel Application of Parallel Robots

2007· article· en· W2113860323 on OpenAlexafffund
Philippe Cardou, Jorge Angeles

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings - IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation/Proceedings · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAccelerometerAccelerationKinematicsProof massDisplacement (psychology)Computer scienceMicroelectromechanical systemsRigid bodyPiezoresistive effectAcousticsMaterials scienceEngineeringPhysicsElectrical engineeringNanotechnology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Several triaxial accelerometers are known. However, to the knowledge of the authors, no true, triaxial accelerometers are commercially available. By true we mean an accelerometer which would pick up the three components of point-accelerations using one single proof-mass. What we propose is novel architecture classes of parallel-kinematics-machine for multi-axial accelerometers, that is, accelerometers that can measure n components of point-accelerations, where n = 1, 2, 3. We call these architectures simplectic, as they use n + 1 legs oriented normally to the n + 1 faces of the regular simplex associated with the n-dimensional subspace of measured acceleration components. We show that the simplectic biaxial accelerometer can be fabricated using micromachining MEMS techniques, while the simplectic triaxial accelerometer lends itself to compliant-mechanism fabrication techniques. CAD models of the prototypes proposed are provided for all of the three novel mechanical architectures proposed. Finally, the direct kinematics problems associated with the simplectic biaxial and triaxial accelerometers are shown to be linear in both cases. This feature simplifies the estimation of the proof-mass displacement from piezoresistive or piezoelectric measurements taken at the flexible joints connecting the legs of the mechanism to the rigid body whose acceleration is under estimation.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations12
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings - IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation/ProceedingsSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207