MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801309182 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2002-0003

SINGULAR CONFIGURATIONS OF WRIST-PARTITIONED 6R SERIAL ROBOTS: A GEOMETRIC PERSPECTIVE FOR USERS

2002· article· en· W2801309182 on OpenAlexaffvenue
M. John D. Hayes, Manfred Husty, Paul Zsombor-Murray

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJacobian matrix and determinantGravitational singularitySerial manipulatorRobotOrientation (vector space)Point (geometry)Perspective (graphical)MathematicsInvertible matrixRobot end effectorComputer scienceSingular point of a curveWristTopology (electrical circuits)Artificial intelligenceMathematical analysisGeometryParallel manipulatorPure mathematicsCombinatoricsApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper the singular configurations of wrist-partitioned 6R serial robots in general, and the KUKA KR-15/2 industrial robot in particular, are analytically described and classified. While the results are not new, the insight provided by the geometric analysis for users of such robots is. Examining the problem in the joint axis parameter space, it is shown that when the end-effector reference point is taken to be the wrist centre the determinant of the associated Jacobian matrix splits into four factors, three of which can vanish. Two of the three potentially vanishing factors give a complete description of the positioning singularities and the remaining one a complete description of the orientation singularities, in turn providing a classification scheme.

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 score0.802
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations45
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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