On the Ability of a Cable-Driven Robot to Generate a Prescribed Set of Wrenches
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 presents a new geometry-based method to determine if a cable-driven robot operating in a d-degree-of-freedom workspace (2≤d≤6) with n≥d cables can generate a given set of wrenches in a given pose, considering acceptable minimum and maximum tensions in the cables. To this end, the fundamental nature of the available wrench set is studied. The latter concept, defined here, is closely related to similar sets introduced by Ebert-Uphoff and co-workers (2004, “Force-Feasible Workspace Analysis for Underconstrained, Point-Mass Cable Robots,” IEEE Trans. Rob. Autom., 5, pp. 4956–4962; 2007, “Workspace Optimization of a Very Large Cable-Driven Parallel Mechanism for a Radiotelescope Application,” Proceedings of the ASME IDETC/CIE Mechanics and Robotics Conference, Las Vegas, NV). It is shown that the available wrench set can be represented mathematically by a zonotope, a special class of convex polytopes. Using the properties of zonotopes, two methods to construct the available wrench set are discussed. From the representation of the available wrench set, computationally efficient and noniterative tests are presented to verify if this set includes the task wrench set, the set of wrenches needed for a given task.
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