MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2799857674 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2005-0046

VELOCITY-LEVEL KINEMATICS OF THE ATLAS SPHERICAL ORIENTING DEVICE USING OMNI-WHEELS

2005· article· en· W2799857674 on OpenAlexaffvenue
James Robinson, J.B. Holland, M. John D. Hayes, Robert Langlois

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsAtlas (anatomy)Jacobian matrix and determinantInvertible matrixComputer scienceInverse kinematicsArchitectureSimulationGeometryControl theory (sociology)MathematicsArtificial intelligencePhysicsClassical mechanicsPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a novel actuation concept employing omni-directional wheels (or simply omni-wheels), the Atlas simulator motion platform provides unlimited angular displacement about any axis. The Atlas concept completely decouples the orienting and positioning degrees-of-freedom and further decouples each of the positioning degrees-of-freedom. It consists of an omni-wheel driven sphere for orientation that has its geometric centre positioned by an $XYZ$-table. The Jacobian of the orienting device is independent of time and dependent only on the mechanism architecture, meaning that it is always invertible for any configuration provided that the initial design parameters do not result in architecture singularities. An examination of the Atlas Jacobian and its determinant identifies architecture singular design conditions. It is found that these are not design limiting. Discussion highlights the uniqueness of the Atlas concept and its associated kinematic advantages.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.214
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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations18
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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