MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2802997444 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2013-0009

DESIGN FOR OPTIMAL PERFORMANCE OF 3-RPS PARALLEL MANIPULATOR USING EVOLUTIONARY ALGORITHMS

2013· article· en· W2802997444 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sabbavarapu Ramana Babu, Vegesina Ramachandra Raju, K. Ramji

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorkspaceJacobian matrix and determinantSortingParallel manipulatorComputer scienceKinematicsConstraint (computer-aided design)Multi-objective optimizationGenetic algorithmMathematical optimizationControl theory (sociology)Optimal designManipulator (device)AlgorithmMathematicsControl (management)RobotArtificial intelligenceApplied mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an optimal kinematic design for a general type of 3-RPS spatial parallel manipulator based on multi-objective optimization. The objective functions considered are Global Conditioning Index (GCI), Global stiffness Index (GSI) and Workspace volume. The objective functions are optimized simultaneously to improve the dexterity as well as the workspace volume which represents the working capacity of a parallel manipulator. A multi-objective Evolutionary Algorithm based on the control elitist non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm is adopted to find the true optimal Pareto front. A constraint Jacobian matrix is derived analytically and the manipulator workspace is generated by numerical search method. The static analysis of the manipulator is also carried out to determine the compliance of the end-effecter.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.178 · 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

Citations17
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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