Design and Optimization of a Hybrid-Driven Waist Rehabilitation Robot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper a waist rehabilitation robot driven by cables and pneumatic artificial muscles (PAMs) has been conceptualized and designed. In the process of mechanism design, the human body structure, the waist movement characteristics, and the actuators' driving characteristics are the main considerable factors to make the hybrid-driven waist rehabilitation robot (HWRR) cost-effective, safe, flexible, and well-adapted. A variety of sensors are chosen to measure the position and orientation of the recovery patient to ensure patient safety at the same time as the structure design. According to the structure specialty and function, the HWRR is divided into two independent parallel robots: the waist twist device and the lower limb traction device. Then these two devices are analyzed and evaluated, respectively. Considering the characters of the human body in the HWRR, the inverse kinematics and statics are studied when the waist and the lower limb are considered as a spring and link, respectively. Based on the inverse kinematics and statics, the effect of the contraction parameter of the PAM is considered in the optimization of the waist twist device, and the lower limb traction device is optimized using particle swarm optimization (PSO) to minimize the global conditioning number over the feasible workspace. As a result of the optimization, an optimal rehabilitation robot design is obtained and the condition number of the Jacobian matrix over the feasible workspace is also calculated.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".