Kinematics of Soft Robots by Geometric Computing
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
Robots fabricated with soft materials can provide higher flexibility and, thus, better safety while interacting in unpredictable situations. However, the usage of soft material makes it challenging to predict the deformation of a continuum body under actuation and, therefore, brings difficulty to the kinematic control of its movement. In this article, we present a geometry-based framework for computing the deformation of soft robots within the range of linear material elasticity. After formulating both manipulators and actuators as geometry elements, deformation can be efficiently computed by solving a constrained optimization problem. Because of its efficiency, forward and inverse kinematics for soft manipulators can be solved by an iterative algorithm with a low computational cost. Meanwhile, components with multiple materials can also be geometrically modeled in our framework with the help of a simple calibration. Numerical and physical experimental tests are conducted on soft manipulators driven by different actuators with large deformation to demonstrate the performance of our approach.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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