MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2400199664 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2007-0028

A PROJECTED GRADIENT AUGMENTED LAGRANGIAN APPROACH TO MULTI-OBJECTIVE TRAJECTORY PLANNING OF REDUNDANT ROBOTS

2007· article· en· W2400199664 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Amar Khoukhi, Luc Baron, Marek Balazinski

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)WorkspaceRedundancy (engineering)KinematicsRobotActuatorAugmented Lagrangian methodComputer scienceTrajectoryConstraint (computer-aided design)Serial manipulatorInverse kinematicsMathematical optimizationMathematicsParallel manipulatorArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, a multi-objective trajectory planning system is developed for redundant manipulators. This system involves kinematic redundancy resolution, as well as robot dynamics, including actuators model. The kinematic redundancy is taken into account through a secondary criterion of joint limits avoidance. The optimization procedure is performed subject to limitations on actuator torques and workspace, while passing through imposed poses. The Augmented Lagrangian with decoupling (ALD) technique is used to solve the resulting constrained non-convex and non-linear optimal control problem. Furthermore, the final state constraint is solved using a gradient projection. Simulations on a three degrees of freedom planar redundant serial manipulator show the effectiveness of the proposed system.

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 score0.634
Threshold uncertainty score0.774

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.202 · 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

Citations13
Published2007
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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