MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2577209731 · doi:10.1080/713745635

Computational Intelligence Based Approach for the Joint Trajectory Generation of Cooperative Robotic Systems

2002· article· en· W2577209731 on OpenAlexaff
Wail Gueaieb, Fakhri Karray, Salah Al-Sharhan

Bibliographic record

VenueSystems Analysis Modelling Simulation · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceInverse kinematicsTrajectoryKinematicsJoint (building)Degrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)RobotRoboticsArtificial intelligenceControl engineeringInverse dynamicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We discuss here the implementation aspects of recently developed tools of computational intelligence as applied to joint trajectory generation of a class of multi-joint cooperative robotic systems. This is an issue closely related to the inverse kinematics problem which usually represents a heavy computational burden on the processing power of any complex robotic structure. High nonlinearities, heavy coupling between the degrees of freedom, and time variant configuration of the robot structure heavily contribute to these difficulties. Soft computing techniques have surged in recent years as effective computational tools for emulating the human capabilities when dealing with complex systems. Some of them are used here to synthesize approaches capable of substantially improving the solving of the inverse kinematics problem for a class of robotic systems and help in generating the joint trajectories in a faster way. Comparative results are provided in terms of accuracy and CPU time required for the execution of different trajectories.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.818
Threshold uncertainty score0.648

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.122 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

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
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSystems Analysis Modelling SimulationSame topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207