Modeling and Analysis of a Planar Soft Panel Continuum Mechanism
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Continuum mechanisms have drawn wide attention to scholars due to their salient advantages including compliance and dexterity. In this paper, a planar continuum mechanism made of soft panels is proposed. This mechanism has a reduced degree-of-freedom (DOF) compared with some existing continuum mechanisms capable of 3D motion. However, it can meet some application requirements in the field of robot and aerospace due to its characteristics of small stiffness in the motion plane and large stiffness perpendicular to the motion plane. Besides, a combined kinematics and statics modeling approach is presented for this mechanism by using the classical beam theory and a constrained optimization method. In order to ensure the model accuracy, a hybrid approach is proposed to consider gravity depending on the deformation under study. By comparing our results with those from the commonly used constant-curvature method, it is shown that our model is more accurate in predicting the deformation shapes.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it