MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909012751 · doi:10.1115/1.4042486

Dynamic Trajectory Planning and Geometric Analysis of a Two-Degree-of-Freedom Translational Cable-Suspended Planar Parallel Robot Using a Parallelogram Cable Loop

2019· article· en· W2909012751 on OpenAlexafffund
Jordan M. Longval, Clément Gosselin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Mechanisms and Robotics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanada Research Chairs
KeywordsParallelogramWorkspaceControl theory (sociology)PlanarKinematicsParallel manipulatorTrajectoryRobotActuatorComputer scienceTopology (electrical circuits)MathematicsEngineeringPhysicsArtificial intelligenceClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a trajectory planning approach and an analysis of the geometric design parameters for a planar cable-suspended translational parallel robot based on a parallelogram cable loop. The cable robot produces purely translational movements in a planar workspace. Furthermore, this special architecture only requires two actuators, which make it fully actuated. From the dynamic model of the robot, general algebraic inequalities are obtained that ensure that the cables remain taut. A general elliptic trajectory is then defined and substituted into the algebraic inequalities to obtain conditions on the geometrical design parameters that ensure that the cables are always in tension. In addition, a special trajectory-specific oscillation frequency emerges and enables the end effector to dynamically move beyond the boundaries of the static workspace, thus expanding the workspace of the mechanism. Finally, a kinematic sensitivity index is studied in order to determine if the parallelogram structure has any influence on the rotational sensitivity of the mechanism.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations12
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Mechanisms and RoboticsSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207