MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118928504 · doi:10.1109/tro.2020.3043688

Simultaneous Calibration of Multicoordinates for a Dual-Robot System by Solving the AXB = YCZ Problem

2021· article· en· W3118928504 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Robotics · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsIterative methodKronecker productMathematical optimizationComputer scienceRobotTransformation (genetics)Dual (grammatical number)CalibrationBase (topology)Process (computing)MathematicsAlgorithmControl theory (sociology)Artificial intelligenceKronecker delta

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Multirobot systems have shown great potential in dealing with complicated tasks that are impossible for a single robot to achieve. One essential problem encountered in cooperatively working of the multirobot systems is the unknown initial transformation relationships from hand to eye, base to base, and flange to tool. In this article, the problem of multicoordinates calibration for a dual-robot system is formulated to a matrix equation AXB = YCZ. A novel approach for simultaneously solving the unknowns in equation AXB = YCZ is proposed, which is composed of a closed form method based on the Kronecker product and an iterative method which converts the calculation of a nonlinear problem to an optimization problem of a strictly convex function. The closed form method is used to quickly obtain an initial estimation for the iterative method to improve the efficiency and accuracy of iteration. In addition, a series of conditions on the solvability of the problem are proposed to guide the operators to select appropriate robot attitudes during the calibration process. To show the feasibility and superiority of the proposed iterative method, two other calibration methods are chosen to be compared to the proposed method through simulation and practical experiments. The comparison results verify the superiority of the proposed method in accuracy, efficiency, and stability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.746
Threshold uncertainty score0.682

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.205
Teacher spread0.196 · 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