MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2325845790 · doi:10.1109/tmech.2016.2551557

A Slip Detection and Correction Strategy for Precision Robot Grasping

2016· article· en· W2325845790 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGRASPSlip (aerodynamics)GrippersRigidity (electromagnetism)KinematicsComputer scienceComputer visionRobotDetectorArtificial intelligenceControl theory (sociology)Point (geometry)EngineeringPhysicsMathematicsMechanical engineeringStructural engineeringControl (management)Classical mechanicsGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a grasp force regulation strategy for precision grasps. The strategy makes no assumptions about object properties and surface characteristics, and can be used with a wide range of grippers. It has two components, a slip signal detector that computes the magnitude of slip and a grasping force set point generator that acts on the detector's output. The force set point generator is designed to ensure that slip is eliminated without using excessive force. This is particularly important in several situations like grasping fragile objects or in-hand manipulation of thin small objects. Several experiments were conducted to simulate various grasping scenarios with different objects. Results show that the strategy was very successful in dealing with uncertainty in object mass, surface characteristics, or rigidity. The strategy is also insensitive to robot motion.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.650

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 head0.244
Teacher spread0.220 · 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