MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2304762983 · doi:10.1115/detc2015-47877

Design of a Soft Multi-Degree of Freedom Tool Positioner With Variable Stiffness Integrating Molded Air Muscles Actuation, Granular Jamming and Dielectric Elastomer Sensing

2015· article· en· W2304762983 on OpenAlexaff
Guillaume Bouliane-Blais, Jean‐Sébastien Plante

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSoft roboticsRoboticsJammingPneumatic actuatorWorkspaceArtificial intelligenceStiffnessRobotComputer scienceActuatorSimulationEngineeringControl engineeringMechanical engineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Soft technology is more and more present in robotics allowing safe interaction with humans, high dexterity in constrained environments, and safe manipulation of fragile or undefined objects. However, soft robotics is limited by a fundamental trade-off between available workspace and stiffness. Position feedback is also challenging as soft robots generally use deformable mechanisms instead of discrete joints. Here, the design of a soft four-degree-of-freedom tool positioner integrating a brake system and a soft sensor is proposed to address these issues. The design integrates molded air muscle actuators, granular jamming brakes, and Dielectric Elastomer Sensors (DES). The design is experimentally validated based on the requirements of a manipulator for liver cancer treatment, which is a representative application of soft robotics. The use of granular jamming mitigates the fundamental trade-off of soft robotics as it allows the manipulator to reach a large workspace (1500 cm3) while having the capacity to provide a high stiffness (up to19 times the initial stiffness). DES provides satisfactory position feedback, demonstrating a 0.69 mm accuracy that is lower than the 1 mm requirement. The proposed design using granular jamming and DES could greatly benefit human-safe and medical robotics.

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 score0.512
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.193 · 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 topicSoft Robotics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207