Energy-aware redundant actuation for safe spring-assisted modular and reconfigurable robot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract A spring-assisted modular and reconfigurable robot (SA-MRR) has been recently developed at our laboratory to reinforce its performance and enable safe and dexterous operation in human–robot environments. Multiple working mode (MWM) control enables each SA-MRR joint module to switch independently between working in a primary actuation mode and a secondary, spring-assisted mode that may improve task-specific energy performance measures and safety in a variety of manipulation tasks. The spring-assisted mode is characterized by synergy of spring and motor energy and may be summoned to offset motor energy demands or to safeguard a reconfigurable set of secondary joint limits. In this research work, two spring-assisted working mode strategies are proposed, and their characteristics have been investigated for SA-MRR actuation energy advantages while safe robot segregation in collaboration tasks is maintained. One MWM strategy has been designed to safeguard task-specific joint limits and is able to decrease motor energy consumption in some tasks. Another MWM strategy has been designed for energy efficiency and was able to reduce motor energy per cycle by $ \text{72}$ % in a simulated manipulation task while maintaining spatial safety constraints. Numerical simulations have demonstrated the effectiveness of the proposed spring-assisted working mode strategies for energy-aware safe manipulation applications.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".