Postcapture stabilization of space robots considering actuator failures with bounded torques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Space robotics is regarded as one of the most impressing approaches for space debris removal missions. Due to the residual momentum of debris, it is essential to stabilize the base rapidly after capture. This paper presents a novel control strategy for stabilization of a space robot in postcapture considering actuator failures and bounded torques. In the control strategy, the motion of the manipulator is not regarded as a disturbance to the base; in contrast, it is utilized to compensate for the limitation of the control torques by means of an inverse dynamical model of the system. Different scenarios where actuators are external mechanisms or momentum exchange devices have been carried out, and for actuator failures , both single- and two-actuator failures have been considered. Regarding to the performance of actuators, control torques are bounded. In cases that either single or two actuators have failed, the base can be stabilized kinematically when actuators are external mechanisms, but can only be stabilized dynamically when only momentum exchange devices are used. Finally, a space robot with a seven-degree-of-freedom manipulator in postcapture is studied to verify the validity and feasibility of the proposed control scheme. Simulation results show that the whole system can be stabilized rapidly.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".