MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W25286562 · doi:10.1299/kikaic.69.2323

Evaluation Criteria for Multi-Joint Arm Configuration in Space Robotics Operations

2003· article· en· W25286562 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
若田 光一, 柴田 智哉

Bibliographic record

VenueTRANSACTIONS OF THE JAPAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS Series C · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Satellite Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRoboticsRedundancy (engineering)International Space StationJoint (building)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceSimulationSpace ShuttleManipulator (device)RobotRobotic armSpace (punctuation)EngineeringAeronauticsAerospace engineeringOperating system

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian Space Station Remote Manipulator System (SSRMS) that consists of 7 joints has been in operation since 2001 aboard the International Space Station (ISS). The extensive operational experience of the Space Shuttle's Remote Manipulator System (SRMS), which has 6 joints, played a significant role in the design and operation of the ISS robotics. However, optimization of the ISS robotics operation for different types of tasks utilizing the unique redundancy characteristics of the 7-joint systems is still underway. In this study, we have proposed three evaluation indices for multi-joint arm configurations in order to avoid collision with surrounding structures. Based on the evaluation of operations of the SSRMS a demonstration model, it has turned out that the proposed indices are beneficial for enhancing clearance monitoring of the arm with respect to the surrounding structures. Furthermore we have proposed an operation support display to contribute to the operational safety and mission success.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.022
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTRANSACTIONS OF THE JAPAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS Series CSame topicSpace Satellite Systems and ControlFrench-language works237,207