Sensor-free Force Control of Tendon-driven Ablation Catheters through Position Control and Contact Modeling
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
In the present study, a sensor-free force control framework for tendon-driven steerable catheters was proposed and validated. The hypothesis of this study was that the contact force between the catheter tip and the tissue could be controlled using the estimated force with a previously validated displacement-based viscoelastic tissue model. The tissue model was used in a feedback control loop. The model estimated the contact force based on a realtime estimation of catheter-tissue indentation depth performed by a data-driven inverse kinematic model. To test the hypothesis, a tendon-driven catheter (φ6 × 40mm) and a robotic catheter intervention system were prototyped and characterized. Three validation studies were performed to test the performance of the proposed system with static and dynamic inputs. The results showed that the system was capable of reaching to the desired force with a root-mean-square error of 0.03 ± 0.02N for static tests and 0.05 ± 0.04N for dynamic inputs. The main contribution of this study was providing a computationally efficient and sensor-free force control schema for tendon-driven catheters.
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