Cable-Less, Magnetically Driven Forceps for Minimally Invasive Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this letter, a novel end-effector for surgical applications is presented that uses magnetic actuation in lieu of a more traditional cable-driven tool with the goal of providing high dexterity in hard-to-reach locations by decoupling the tool actuation from the rest of the surgical system. The gripper and wrist device consists of several magnets connected with compliant Nitinol joints that allow two rotational degrees of freedom and one gripping degree of freedom. As an end-effector for an existing surgical robot arm, this device could augment existing minimally invasive surgical robots by allowing high distal dexterity in surgical sites with narrow and restricted access. A static deflection model of the device is used to design an open-loop controller. The current prototype is capable of exerting pushing/pulling forces of 9 mN and gripping forces of 6 mN when magnetic flux densities of 20 mT are applied by a laboratory-scale electromagnetic coil system. These forces could be greatly amplified in a clinical-scale system to make brain tissue resection feasible. Under open-loop control, the wrist of the device can maneuver from +λ/4 to -λ/4 rad in less than 1 s with a maximum error of 0.12 rad.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".