Instantaneous-Stiffness Plane Analysis of Underactuated Fingers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The general stiffness of an underactuated finger as seen from the actuator is a function of its internal compliant elements, such as springs, but also depends on its geometry. In this paper, a complete stiffness analysis of a general underactuated finger is presented. The objective is to shed light on important aspects to consider while designing underactuated fingers and how to take advantage of the finger’s stiffness during grasping, for instance in order to estimate information such as contact location and force magnitude. This is done using the instantaneous-stiffness plane of the finger introduced in this paper. This plane shows the relationship between the finger’s geometry and its instantaneous stiffness and how simple changes in geometrical parameters can have significant effects on the finger’s stiffness. This novel tool can be used for a wide range of underactuated finger architectures as will be shown. First, a theoretical framework including numerical simulations is presented. This is then followed by an optimization example of a finger’s geometry and a discussion.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".