MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214569027 · doi:10.1002/rcs.2384

Visual servoing of continuum robots: Methods, challenges, and prospects

2022· review· en· W4214569027 on OpenAlexafffund
Ali Nazari, Kourosh Zareinia, Farrokh Janabi‐Sharifi

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted Surgery · 2022
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaRyerson University
KeywordsVisual servoingComputer scienceRobotArtificial intelligenceComputer vision

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Recent advancements in continuum robotics have accentuated developing efficient and stable controllers to handle shape deformation and compliance. The control of continuum robots (CRs) using physical sensors attached to the robot, particularly in confined spaces, is difficult due to their limited accuracy in three-dimensional deflections and challenging localisation. Therefore, using non-contact imaging sensors finds noticeable importance, particularly in medical scenarios. Accordingly, given the need for direct control of the robot tip and notable uncertainties in the kinematics and dynamics of CRs, many papers have focussed on the visual servoing (VS) of CRs in recent years. METHODS: The significance of this research towards safe human-robot interaction has fuelled our survey on the previous methods, current challenges, and future opportunities. RESULTS: Beginning with actuation modalities and modelling approaches, the paper investigates VS methods in medical and non-medical scenarios. CONCLUSIONS: Finally, challenges and prospects of VS for CRs are discussed, followed by concluding remarks.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations36
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Medical Robotics and Computer Assisted SurgerySame topicSoft Robotics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207