A Fast Algorithm for Contact Dynamics of Multibody Systems Using the Box Friction Model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the major challenges in dynamics of multibody systems is to handle redundant constraints appropriately. The box friction model is one of the existing approaches to formulate the contact and friction phenomenon as a mixed linear complementarity problem (MLCP). In this setting, the contact redundancy can be handled by relaxing the constraints, but such a technique might suffer from certain drawbacks, specially in the case of large number of redundant constraints. Most of the common pivoting algorithms used to solve the resulting mixed complementarity problem might not converge when the relaxation terms are chosen as small as they should be. To overcome the aforementioned shortcoming, we propose a novel approach which takes advantage of the sparse structure of the formulated MLCP. This novel approach reduces the sensitivity of the solution of the problem to the relaxation terms and decreases the number of required pivots to obtain the solution, leading to shorter computational times. Furthermore, as a result of the proposed approach, much smaller relaxation terms can be used while the solution algorithms converge.
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) | 0.000 | 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".