Design and analysis of kinematically redundant parallel manipulators with configurable platforms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Redundancy can, in general, improve the ability and performance of parallel manipulators by implementing the redundant degrees of freedom to optimize a secondary objective function. Almost all published researches in the area of parallel manipulators redundancy were focused on the design and analysis of redundant parallel manipulators with rigid (nonconfigurable) platforms and on grasping hands to be attached to the platforms. Conventional grippers usually are not appropriate to grasp irregular or large objects. Very few studies focused on the idea of using a configurable platform as a grasping device. This paper highlights the idea of using configurable platforms in both planar and spatial redundant parallel manipulators, and generalizes their analysis. The configurable platform is actually a closed kinematic chain of mobility equal to the degree of redundancy of the manipulator. The additional redundant degrees of freedom are used in reconfiguring the shape of the platform itself. Several designs of kinematically redundant planar and spatial parallel manipulators with configurable platform are presented. Such designs can be used as a grasping device especially for irregular or large objects or even as a micro-positioning device after grasping the object. Screw algebra is used to develop a general framework that can be adapted to analyze the kinematics of any general-geometry planar or spatial kinematically redundant parallel manipulator with configurable platform.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".