MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2138485100 · doi:10.1109/tro.2009.2032959

Analytical Modeling and Experimental Validation of the Braided Pneumatic Muscle

2009· article· en· W2138485100 on OpenAlex

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

VenueIEEE Transactions on Robotics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFixtureComputer scienceMechanical engineeringNewtonian fluidMechanicsSimulationControl theory (sociology)Control engineeringEngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Static models of braided pneumatic muscles (BPMs) reported in the research literature fairly accurately predict the muscle-force-carrying capacity. These models, however, rely on experimentally determined parameters that are valid only for the specific muscle configuration under consideration. This paper presents a fully analytical BPM static model that does not depend on experimentally determined parameters. The proposed approach is based on Newtonian mechanics that considers the mechanical and the geometrical properties of the muscle. Distinctively, this paper includes the muscle end-fixture-diameter effect. Results from the developed model are compared with the experimental ones that have been obtained from prototype BPMs.

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 score0.599
Threshold uncertainty score0.308

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.223 · 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