Two-agent formation control of magnetic microrobots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a new method to control multiple micro-scale magnetic agents operating in close proximity to each other for applications in microrobotics. Controlling multiple magnetic microrobots close to each other is difficult due to magnetic interactions between the agents, and here we seek to control those interactions for the creation of desired multi-agent formations. We use the fact that all magnetic agents orient to the global input magnetic field to modulate the local attraction-repulsion forces between nearby agents. Here we study these controlled interaction magnetic forces for agents at a water-air interface and devise two controllers to regulate the inter-agent spacing and heading of the set, for motion in two dimensions. Simulation and experimental demonstrations show the feasibility of the idea and its potential for the completion of complex tasks using teams of microrobots. Average tracking error of less than 73 μm and 14° is accomplished for the regulation of the inter-agent space and the pair heading angle, respectively, for identical disk-shape agents with nominal radius of 500 μm and thickness of 80 μm operating within several body-lengths of each other.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".