Singularity Analysis and Design of Kinematically Redundant Parallel Mechanisms
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper addresses the singularity analysis and design of two new types of kinematically redundant parallel mechanisms, i.e., the four-degree-of-freedom planar and spherical parallel mechanisms. The main idea in the design of these parallel manipulators is the addition of one redundant degree of freedom in one of the kinematic chains of the nonredundant manipulator. Such manipulators can be used to avoid the singularities inside the workspace of nonredundant manipulators. After describing the geometry of the manipulators, the velocity equations are derived and the expressions for the Jacobian matrices are obtained. Then, the singularity conditions are discussed. Finally, the expressions of the singularity loci of the kinematically redundant mechanisms are obtained and the singularity loci of the nonredundant and redundant manipulators are compared. It is shown here that the conditions for the singularity of the redundant manipulators are reduced drastically relative to the nonredundant ones. As a result, the proposed kinematically redundant parallel manipulators may be of great interest in several applications.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it