MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213608428 · doi:10.1115/imece2000-2330

Application of Simulated Annealing to Dexterous Object Manipulation With Multiple Agents

2000· article· en· W3213608428 on OpenAlexaff
Gábor Vass, Shahram Payandeh, Béla Lantos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGRASPObject (grammar)Computer scienceComputer visionSimulated annealingArtificial intelligenceMotion (physics)Position (finance)SimulationAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The manipulation task (called object re-configuration problem) is stated as the following: given an initial grasp of the object find the motion’s trajectories of the agents to move the object to the desired configuration. In general collision free paths for all agents must be found toward the contact points on the object (pre-grasp configuration) and the grasping and manipulation forces should then be exerted on the object by the agents. These forces are determined first to ensure a stable grasp, then to manipulate the object. We present a model based motion planner algorithm for manipulating agents for object re-configuration using simulated annealing (SA) algorithm for generating the relative motion between the object and agents. The motion of the agents relative to the object can be pure sliding, pure rolling, breaking contact and agent relocation is allowed. The motion sequence is represented by a relative velocity matrix. The algorithm can be used for example to move a known shaped object to a different position and orientation with a robotic hand. Simulation results are presented.

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 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.319
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207