MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799797714 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2007-0035

SELF CALIBRATION OF 3-PRS MANIPULATOR WITHOUT REDUNDANT SENSORS

2007· article· en· W2799797714 on OpenAlexaffvenue
S. M. O’Brien, Juan A. Carretero, P. Last

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsCalibrationActuatorParallel manipulatorComputer scienceManipulator (device)Serial manipulatorControl theory (sociology)ReplicateRobot calibrationControl engineeringSimulationControl (management)RobotArtificial intelligenceRobot kinematicsMathematicsEngineeringMobile robot

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper a new calibration strategy that does not require any sensors beyond those used to control actuators is applied to the 3-PRS parallel manipulator. Parallel manipulators have several advantages over their serial counterparts, but have seen limited use because of low accuracy, among other reasons. Calibration allows the kinematic model that is used to control the manipulator to be adjusted to more closely replicate the physical manipulator. The architecture and kinematics of the 3-PRS are presented, as well an explanation of this new calibration strategy. The strategy makes use of direct kinematic singularities to obtain the redundant information required for calibration Implementation of the algorithms accomplished via a nested series of optimization problems, each one accomplishing a simpler stage of the overall procedure. A simulated calibration is performed, and the algorithm successfully returns the exact values used to generate the test data.

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)0.000
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 score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.196
Teacher spread0.187 · 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

Citations15
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207