MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2151326193 · doi:10.1017/s0263574713000544

Orientation-singularity analysis and orientationability evaluation of a special class of the Stewart–Gough parallel manipulators

2013· article· en· W2151326193 on OpenAlexaff
Yi Cao, Clément Gosselin, Hui Zhou, Ping Ren, Weixi Ji

Bibliographic record

VenueRobotica · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkspaceSingularityGravitational singularityOrientation (vector space)Position (finance)Parallel manipulatorInvertible matrixDiscretizationComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)MathematicsArtificial intelligenceGeometryMathematical analysisRobotPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY This paper addresses the orientation-singularity analysis and the orientationability evaluation of a special class of the Stewart–Gough parallel manipulators in which the moving and base platforms are two similar semi-symmetrical hexagons. Based on the half-angle transformation, an analytical polynomial of degree 13 that represents the orientation-singularity locus of this special class of parallel manipulators at a given position is derived. Graphical representations of the orientation-singularity locus of this class of manipulators are illustrated with examples to demonstrate the results. Based on the description of the orientation-singularity and nonsingular orientation region of this class of parallel manipulators, a performance index, referred to as orientationability , which describes the orientation capability of this class of manipulators at a given position, is introduced. A discretization algorithm is proposed for computing the orientationability of the special class of parallel manipulators at a given position in the workspace. Moreover, the effects of the design parameters and position parameters on the orientationability are also investigated in detail. Based on the orientationability performance index, another performance index, referred to as practical orientationability , representing the practical orientation capability of the manipulators at a given position, is introduced. In this performance index, singularities, the limitations of active and passive joints and link interferences are all taken into consideration. Furthermore, the practical orientationability of the special class of parallel manipulators studied here is also analyzed over several plane sections of the position-workspace in detail.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.310
Threshold uncertainty score0.289

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

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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoboticaSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207