FORCE-UNCONSTRAINED POSES FOR PARALLEL MANIPULATORS WITH REDUNDANT ACTUATED BRANCHES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A study of the effect of including a redundant actuated branch on the existence of force-unconstrained configurations for a planar parallel layout of joints is presented 1 . Two methodologies for finding the force-unconstrained poses are described and discussed. The first method involves the differentiation of the nonlinear kinematic constraints of the input and output variables with respect to time. The second method makes use of the reciprocal screws associated with the actuated joints. The force-unconstrained poses of non-redundantly actuated planar parallel manipulators can be mathematically expressed by means of a polynomial in terms of the three variables that define the dimensional space of the planar manipulator, i.e., the location and orientation of the end-effector. The inclusion of redundant actuated branches leads to a system of polynomials, i.e., one additional polynomial for each redundant branch added. Elimination methods are employed to reduce the number of variables by one for every additional polynomial. This leads to a higher order polynomial with fewer variables. The roots of the resulting polynomial describe the force-unconstrained poses of the manipulator. For planar manipulators it is shown that one order of infinity of force-unconstrained configurations is eliminated for every actuated branch, beyond three, added. As an example, the four-branch revolute-prismatic-revolute mechanism (4-RPR), where the prismatic joints are actuated, is presented.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".