MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2271317633 · doi:10.1115/1.4032401

Designing Multi-Axis Force–Torque Sensors by Minimizing the Amplitudes of Their Nonlinear Displacements

2015· article· en· W2271317633 on OpenAlexaff
Rachid Bekhti, Philippe Cardou, Vincent Duchaine

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mechanical Design · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJacobian matrix and determinantNonlinear systemCartesian coordinate systemControl theory (sociology)TorqueHaptic technologyMechanism (biology)Computer scienceCompliant mechanismControl engineeringSimulationEngineeringGeometryMathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysicsStructural engineeringFinite element method

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Compliant multi-axis force–torque sensors play a crucial role in many emerging robotic applications, such as telemanipulation, haptic devices and human-robot physical interaction. In order to synthesize the compliant architectures at the core of these sensors, several researchers have devised performance indices from mechanism theory. This paper follows the same approach, but includes the innovation of using the changes in the compliant mechanism geometry as a new performance index. Once external forces are applied, the compliant mechanism deviates from its unloaded configuration, and thus, changes in geometry prevent the sensor from exhibiting a linear response. In order to minimize this nonlinear behavior, the potential sources of error are analyzed by applying linear algebra techniques to the expression of the Cartesian force mapping. Two performance indices are then presented and combined. The first index measures the variations of the Jacobian matrix about the unloaded configuration. The second index measures the amplification of the error arising from the joint displacements measurement. The resulting indices can be expressed symbolically, making them easier to evaluate and synthesize. Finally, we apply the performance indices we have developed to simple compliant mechanisms, and discuss the results.

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)0.002
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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.276
Threshold uncertainty score0.571

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.207 · 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

Citations2
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mechanical DesignSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207