Tip-Over Stability Analysis of a Pelvic Support Walking Robot
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
Discussed in this paper is the tip-over stability analysis of a pelvic support walking robot. To improve the activities of daily living (ADL) in hemiplegic patients, a pelvic support walking robot is proposed to help patients facilitating their rehabilitation. During the gait training with the robot, the abnormal man-machine interaction forces may lead to the tip-over of the robot, which is not beneficial to the rehabilitation process. A new method is proposed to predict the possibility of tipping over and evaluate the stability of the robot based on statics model, dynamics model, and zero-moment point (ZMP) theory. Through the interaction forces and moments analysis with static case, the safe point (ZMP) is studied, and the influence factors of force/moment are analyzed by dynamics case. An optimization algorithm based on the genetic algorithm (GA) is proposed to reduce the risk of tipping over. The simulation results show that the optimization algorithm can keep the robot from tipping over when the interaction forces exceed the safety threshold.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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