MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dynamic planning of redundant robots within a set-based task-priority inverse kinematics framework

2020· article· en· W3090081817 on OpenAlexaff
Daniele Di Vito, Mathieux Bergeron, David Meger, Gregory Dudek, Gianluca Antonelli

Bibliographic record

Venue2020 IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications (CCTA) · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicRobotic Path Planning Algorithms
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityKinova (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverse kinematicsComputer scienceMotion planningRobotKinematicsWorkspaceTask (project management)TrajectoryRobot kinematicsSet (abstract data type)Artificial intelligenceMobile robotEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This work presents the dynamic planning of redundant robots by merging a global and local planner. The global planner is implemented as a sampling-based algorithm which works in the reduced-dimensionality of the robot workspace applying the Cartesian constraints only. The output trajectory is then checked within a framework of set-based task priority inverse kinematics verifying the fulfillment of the other task constraints. The inverse kinematics framework is used also in real-time as local motion control to ensure a reactive behaviour to address, e.g., mismatch between the apriori information and on-line perception acquisition. During the movement, the motion planner runs in background to adapt to changes in the environment or, in general, to continuously optimize the path. The proposed method is experimentally validated with a Kinova Jaco2 7 degrees of freedom manipulator.

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)0.001
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.257 · 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

Citations7
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2020 IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications (CCTA)Same topicRobotic Path Planning AlgorithmsFrench-language works237,207