An anticipative kinematic limitation avoidance algorithm for collaborative robots: Three-dimensional case
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents an anticipative robot kinematic limitation avoidance algorithm for collaborative robots. The main objective is to improve the performance and the intuitivity of physical human-robot interaction. Currently, in such interactions, the human user must focus on the task as well as on the robot configuration. Indeed, the user must pay a close attention to the robot in order to avoid limitations such as joint position limitations, singularities and collisions with the environment. The proposed anticipative algorithm aims at relieving the human user from having to deal with such limitations by automatically avoiding them while considering the user's intentions. The framework developed to manage several limitations occurring simultaneously in three-dimensional space is first presented. The algorithm is then presented and detailed for each individual limitation of a spatial RRR serial robot. Finally, experiments are performed in order to assess the performance of the algorithm.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it