MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2801580312 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2015-0018

ANALYSIS OF JOINT FAILURES ON THE LATERAL UNDULATION GAIT OF A ROBOTIC SNAKE

2015· article· en· W2801580312 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Rishad A. Irani, Robert Bauer, Lydia North, Michael L. Nicholson, David S. Nolan, Brennan West

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityRolls-Royce (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJoint (building)GaitSimulationRobotComputer scienceGround reaction forceControl theory (sociology)GeologyStructural engineeringEngineeringArtificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysicsControl (management)Kinematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes the development of a biologically-inspired hyper-redundant wheeled snake robot and a corresponding computer simulator to study the effects that joint failures have on the resulting lateral undulation motion. Experiments and corresponding simulations were carried out to study the robotic snake’s lateral undulation gait as power to individual joints was turned off. The results showed that joint failures were most detrimental to the snake’s lateral undulation gait when they occurred in the front half of the snake, while joint failures occurring between the midpoint and tail of the robotic snake were found to be less critical and generally resulted in slight lateral drifts as the forward motion progressed. To help compensate for joint failures in the tail-half part of the robot, a bias term was added to the control algorithm. For the conditions tested in this research, the use of a bias term appeared to be effective at reducing the lateral drift.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.924
Threshold uncertainty score0.436

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicSoft Robotics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207