MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790141348 · doi:10.1109/lra.2018.2794618

Improving Industrial Grippers With Adhesion-Controlled Friction

2018· article· en· W2790141348 on OpenAlexafffund
Jean-Philippe Roberge, Wilson Ruotolo, Vincent Duchaine, Mark R. Cutkosky

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface Interactions
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaFord Motor Company
KeywordsGrippersSlippingShear forceMandrelAdhesiveTactile sensorContact forceFabricationMaterials scienceMechanical engineeringContact areaRobotComputer scienceNanotechnologyEngineeringComposite materialArtificial intelligencePhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Effective handling of delicate objects remains a challenging problem in manufacturing. Instead of using a specialized gripper or control scheme, we present a solution involving gecko-inspired directional adhesives affixed to an industrial robot gripper and tactile sensor. The adhesives sustain large shear forces with very low pressure. They also release objects without residual adhesion when the grip is relaxed. It is desirable to predict the maximum forces and moments the gripper can exert without slipping. For this purpose the tactile sensor provides an estimate of the area of contact, and a force/torque sensor measures the overall force and moment. To resist forces and moments in multiple directions, it is best if the directional adhesives do not all have a single orientation. A chevron pattern strikes a good balance between performance and ease of fabrication.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.192 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations50
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicAdhesion, Friction, and Surface InteractionsFrench-language works237,207