Disturbance estimation for robotic systems using continuous integral sliding mode observer
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article presents a novel force‐sensor‐less method for the estimation of external forces for a general class of second‐order robotic systems. The method is based on the integral sliding mode observer (ISMO) which serves as a second‐order differentiator for the position measurement of the system. As a result, the system states and disturbance are estimated without explicitly using force and velocity measurements. To apply the ISMO to the general second‐order systems, a proper assumption is proposed to address their nonlinearity and discontinuity. The boundary‐layer method is applied to ensure that the virtual inputs of the observer are continuous such that the chattering phenomenon is attenuated. A Lyapunov‐based method is used to analyze the influence of the boundary layers on the convergence of the state‐ and disturbance‐estimation errors. This influence, mainly determined by the boundary‐layer scalars, is given in analytical forms as a reference for parameter selection. The method is evaluated by numerical simulation on a robot manipulator system and compared with a conventional sliding mode observer (SMO). The validation of the performance of the continuous ISMO indicates its generalizability to general second‐order robotic systems. Also, the advantage of continuous ISMO over the conventional SMO is reflected by its small estimation errors and superior responsiveness. In general, the proposed method in this paper may interest those who are seeking solutions for haptic robotic tasks without using force sensors.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".