MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2232456168 · doi:10.1109/icma.2011.5985635

Novel design of a three DOFs MEMS-based precision manipulator

2011· article· en· W2232456168 on OpenAlexafffund
Min Pan, Dan Zhang, Zhongzhe Chi

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS Technologies
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsKinematicsParallel manipulatorManipulator (device)Flexibility (engineering)Microelectromechanical systemsMechanism (biology)Position (finance)Computer scienceInverse kinematicsStiffnessRobot end effectorDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)Work (physics)Control theory (sociology)Control engineeringEngineeringMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringRobotArtificial intelligenceMaterials sciencePhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel design of three degrees of freedom (DOFs) MEMS-based precision manipulator. The purpose of the manipulator is to position a microscope tool on the work plate doing small movement tasks. A parallel kinematic mechanism with three legs is used to convert the motion of longitudinal comb-drives into three direction translations at the end-effector. Each leg has three joints (a prismatic joint and two universal joints) which consists the basic structure of the design. The manipulator design has a high actuation flexibility combined with a relatively high stiffness due to its structure and materials. A theoretical calculation is revealed to show inverse kinematics. The fabrication of the manipulator is also presented in order to demonstrate the possibility of producing the manipulator.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.148 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced MEMS and NEMS TechnologiesFrench-language works237,207