MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2381265955 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2009-0038

REDUNDANCY RESOLUTION OF WIRE-ACTUATED PARALLEL MANIPULATORS

2009· article· en· W2381265955 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Maryam Agahi, Leila Notash

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkspaceRedundancy (engineering)KinematicsControl theory (sociology)ActuatorSerial manipulatorTorqueComputer sciencePlanarNorm (philosophy)Parallel manipulatorControl engineeringSimulationRobotEngineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Redundant manipulators have potential advantages of using their degree(s) of redundancy to satisfy additional task(s). To achieve desirable performance criteria, various optimization techniques can be applied to redundant manipulators. In the work presented, the redundancy resolution of planar wire-actuated parallel manipulators is investigated at the kinematic and dynamic levels in order to perform desirable tasks while maintaining positive tensions in the wires. Local optimization routines are used in the simulations in order to minimize the norm of actuator forces/torques or to minimize the norm of the mobile platform velocity, subject to positive tension in the wires. This paper presents techniques to alter wire tensions, mobile platform trajectory, mobile platform velocity, and length rate of wires, in order to maintain positive wire tensions. The effectiveness of the presented approaches is studied through simulations of an example planar wire-actuated manipulator. The presented approaches can be utilized in the design of controllers, trajectory planning, and dynamic workspace analysis.

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 score0.879
Threshold uncertainty score0.547

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.193
Teacher spread0.182 · 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

Citations25
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207