Development Of A Bi-Criterion Objective Function For Analytical Inverse Kinematic Methods
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Body posture predicting methods have many applications, such as the product design, ergonomic workplace design, human body simulation, virtual reality and animation industry.Analytic Inverse Kinematic (AIK) method, a convenient and time-saving method, has been widely applied to proactively estimate human body postures.It is indicated that a specific body posture can be determined by the optimization of an arbitrary objective function.The objective of this paper is the prediction of the posture of shoulder and elbow, for reaching tasks.In this paper, the joint displacement function and joint discomfort function are selected to be initially applied in the AIK method.Then, a bi-criterion objective function is proposed, by integrating the joint displacement function and joint discomfort function.Results show that the joint displacement function does not predict accurate body postures when the torso is fixed.The joint discomfort function predicts reasonable posture, but it does not reflect the effects of the initial body posture.The accuracy of the arm postures, predicted by the proposed objective function, is the most satisfactory; while the optimal value of the coefficient, in the proposed objective function, is determined by golden section search.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".