MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2131048417 · doi:10.1109/tmech.2004.828627

A Systematic Procedure for the Design of Piezoelectric Inchworm Precision Positioners

2004· article· en· W2131048417 on OpenAlexaff
P.E. Tenzer, R. Ben Mrad

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicPiezoelectric Actuators and Control
Canadian institutionsCenterLine (Canada)University of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrame (networking)TraverseFinite element methodStiffnessThrustActuatorPiezoelectricityComputer scienceMechanical engineeringControl engineeringControl theory (sociology)EngineeringAcousticsPhysicsStructural engineeringArtificial intelligenceGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Design equations are developed and integrated into a computerized design tool in order to facilitate the creation of inchworm piezoelectric based positioners. Fundamental to the development of the design tool is the piezoelectric actuator and motor frame stiffness interaction and its influence on positioner performance. A generalized motor frame configuration for each of the motor subsystems is presented and used to generate key initial positioner frame geometry. An inchworm precision positioner is implemented based on the generalized motor frame and the computerized design tool and it is shown experimentally and through finite-element analysis that the design approach is effective for precision positioner design. The prototype of the inchworm positioner developed is shown to have a stiffness in the direction of motion of 88 N//spl mu/m, a maximum thrust of 150 N and a traversing speed of up to 20 mm/s.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations107
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE/ASME Transactions on MechatronicsSame topicPiezoelectric Actuators and ControlFrench-language works237,207