MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2152904710 · doi:10.1109/icma.2009.5246001

Global stiffness modeling and optimization of a 5-DOF parallel mechanism

2009· article· en· W2152904710 on OpenAlexaff
Dan Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ontario Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJacobian matrix and determinantKinematicsStiffnessParallel manipulatorComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)ActuatorGlobal optimizationMechanism (biology)Compliant mechanismGenetic algorithmMulti-objective optimizationInverse kinematicsTRACE (psycholinguistics)Mathematical optimizationRobotFinite element methodMathematicsEngineeringAlgorithmApplied mathematicsStructural engineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Global Stiffness design and optimization of parallel mechanisms can be a difficult and time-consuming exercise in parallel robot design, especially when the variables are multifarious and the objective functions are too complex. To address this issue, optimization techniques based on kinetostatic model and genetic algorithms are investigated as the effective criteria. First, a 5-DOF parallel mechanism with a passive constraining leg and five identical legs with prismatic actuators for machine tool is proposed, and its corresponding inverse kinematics, Jacobian matrices and global velocity equation are derived. Second, with the kinetostatic model, the mean value and the standard deviation of the trace of the global compliance distribution are proposed as these two kinetostatic performance indices. Finally, the effectiveness of this optimization design methodology for global stiffness indices is validated with simulation.

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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.528
Threshold uncertainty score0.269

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
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

Citations11
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207