Robust multi-stage hybrid vision/force control of industrial robots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper presents a novel multi-stage method for robust hybrid vision/force control of industrial robots, subject to model uncertainties. It aims to improve the performance of the three phases of the control process: a) free-motion using the image-based visual servoing (IBVS) before the interaction with the workpiece; b) the moment that the end-effector touches the workpiece; and c) hybrid vision/force control during the interaction with the workpiece. First, the camera motion is decomposed into transitional and angular movements. Then, utilizing a switching method, the rotational and translational movements of the camera are controlled in the first two stages, respectively. In the last stage, hybrid vision/force control is activated. For each stage, super-twisting sliding mode controller (STSMC) is utilized. Employing STSMC results in robustness against uncertainties while addressing the chattering problem. A variable-gain sliding surface is also proposed to address the instability and convergence speed issues of the traditional switch IBVS. The experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness and superiority of the proposed multi-stage method compared to other traditional approaches.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".