MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2143920784 · doi:10.1109/robot.2008.4543531

Investigation of human-robot interaction stability using Lyapunov theory

2008· article· en· W2143920784 on OpenAlexaff
Vincent Duchaine, Clément Gosselin

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMuscle activation and electromyography studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)Lyapunov functionContext (archaeology)Impedance controlStability (learning theory)RobotComputer scienceHuman–robot interactionRepresentation (politics)Exponential stabilityArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Machine learningLawNonlinear system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For human-robot cooperation in the context of human-augmentation tasks, the stability of the control model is of great concern due to the risk for the human safety represented by a powerful robot. This paper investigates stability conditions for impedance control in this cooperative context and where touch is used as the sense of interaction. The proposed analysis takes into account human arm and robot physical characteristics, which are first investigated. Then, a global system model including noise filtering and impedance control is defined in a state-space representation. From this representation, a Lyapunov function candidate has been successfully discovered. In addition to providing conclusions on the global asymptotic stability of the system, the relative simplicity of the resulting equation allows the derivation of general expressions for the critical values of impedance parameters. Such knowledge is of great interest in the context of design of new adaptive control laws or simply to serve as design guidelines for conventional impedance control. The accuracy of these results were verified in a user study involving 7 human subjects and a 3-dof parallel robot. In this experiment, the real effective stability frontier was defined for each subject and compared with values predicted using the Lyapunov function.

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 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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.253

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 head0.080
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations75
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMuscle activation and electromyography studiesFrench-language works237,207