MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

PRECISION CONTOUR TRACKING USING FEEDBACK-FEEDFORWARD INTEGRATED CONTROL FOR A 2-DOF MANIPULATION SYSTEM

2018· article· en· W2803983092 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jie Ling, Zhao Feng, Min Ming, Xiaohui Xiao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Robotics and Automation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIndustrial Technology and Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsFeed forwardTracking (education)Computer scienceControl theory (sociology)Feedback controlControl (management)Artificial intelligenceComputer visionControl engineeringEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel approach for precision contour tracking through combining feedback PID and feedforward position domain ILC (PDILC) control for a multi-axis manipulation system.Traditional control approaches in time domain suffer from poor synchronization of relevant motion axes and result in restriction for contour tracking tasks.In the proposed PID & PDILC design, a 2-DOF system is treated as a master-slave cooperative motion system.The position information of the master motion axis is integrated into the PDILC controller of the slave motion axes, which makes the PDILC learn from contour errors instead of individual axis errors.The selection and tuning of parameters for the PID and PDILC were conducted based on the computation in a lifted matrix format of the stability and convergence conditions.The performance of the PID & PDILC controller was evaluated by comparisons with PID and cross-coupled ILC controller through experiments on a multi-axis precise positioning stage.The proposed PID & PDILC design enhances the precision contour tracking of the testbed.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Robotics and AutomationSame topicIndustrial Technology and Control SystemsFrench-language works237,207