MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2964294887 · doi:10.1109/lra.2019.2931133

Quaternion-Based Smooth Trajectory Generator for Via Poses in $\boldsymbol{S\;E(3)}$ Considering Kinematic Limits in Cartesian Space

2019· article· en· W2964294887 on OpenAlexaff
Reinhard M. Grassmann, Jessica Burgner-Kahrs

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuaternionTrajectoryKinematicsGenerator (circuit theory)Interpolation (computer graphics)Cartesian coordinate systemPosition (finance)Orientation (vector space)Inverse kinematicsSingularityComputer scienceMathematicsControl theory (sociology)Mathematical analysisMotion (physics)Artificial intelligenceGeometryPhysicsClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Smooth position and orientation interpolation has a great effect on the performance of robot manipulators. Interpolation between several via positions can be done in a straightforward manner, which is well covered in the literature. However, generating a suitable trajectory between several orientations is still an open problem. In this letter, we introduce a novel trajectory generator capable of respecting kinematic limits. We address the problem of generating a singularity-free trajectory for multiple via poses in SE(3), while complying with the requirement of C4continuity. To achieve this, a smooth trapezoidal-like velocity profile and unit quaternions are used. A simulation platform in V-REP based on a 7-DOF lightweight robot, including inverse kinematics and dynamics is used to demonstrate the effectiveness of our trajectory generator.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.002

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.193 · 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
GenreMethods

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207