MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115031703 · doi:10.1109/robot.1992.219943

Simulation of flexible-link manipulators: basis functions and nonlinear terms in the motion equations

2003· article· en· W2115031703 on OpenAlex
Inna Sharf, Chris Damaren

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicDynamics and Control of Mechanical Systems
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscretizationNonlinear systemContext (archaeology)Basis (linear algebra)Computer scienceEigenfunctionLink (geometry)Motion (physics)Basis functionEquations of motionApplied mathematicsMathematicsArtificial intelligenceMathematical analysisClassical mechanicsGeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Two important issues relevant to modeling of flexible-link robotic manipulators are addressed. The authors examine the question of which terms should be included in the equations of motion for purposes of simulation. A complete model incorporating all nonlinearities that couple rigid-body and elastic motions is presented, along with a rational scheme for classifying their inclusion. The issue of basis function selection for spatial discretization of the elastic displacements is discussed. The finite element method and an eigenfunction expansion techniques are presented and compared. Both issues are examined numerically in the context of the Space Shuttle remote manipulator system. It is shown that certain key nonlinear elastic terms are required if numerical instability of the simulation is to be averted. Simulation results for two discretization schemes are included.< <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.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.900
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.209 · 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