MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294325294 · doi:10.1177/09596518221116268

Flatness tracking control scheme of rehabilitation exoskeleton robot with dynamic uncertainties

2022· article· en· W4294325294 on OpenAlexaff
Soraya Bououden, Brahim Brahmi, Mohammad Habibur Rahman, Maarouf Saad

Bibliographic record

VenueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part I Journal of Systems and Control Engineering · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicProsthetics and Rehabilitation Robotics
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie SupérieureCollege Ahuntsic
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExoskeletonRobustness (evolution)Control theory (sociology)RobotFlatness (cosmology)Computer scienceControl engineeringNonlinear systemController (irrigation)Lyapunov stabilityEngineeringSimulationArtificial intelligenceControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Artificial limbs are new robotic devices created to help stroke victims in the rehabilitation process. In this article, we focus our work on applying passive, active or assistive control strategies to provide a physical assistance and rehabilitation by a 7-degree-of-freedom exoskeleton robot with nonlinear uncertain dynamics and unknown bounded external disturbances due to the robot user’s physiological characteristics. The flatness controller combined with time-delay estimation is designed for the 7-degree-of-freedom exoskeleton robot called ETS-MARSE (Ecole de Technologie Supérieure—Motion Assistive Robotic-exoskeleton for Superior Extremity) in order to ensure a passive rehabilitation exercises with a high level of tracking accuracy and robustness against the uncertainty constraints. The stability analysis of such systems is proven using the Lyapunov–Krasovskii functional theory. This approach is illustrated by experimental results with healthy human to highlight the efficiency of the suggested controller scheme.

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)0.001
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 score0.201
Threshold uncertainty score0.531

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.176
Teacher spread0.172 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers Part I Journal of Systems and Control EngineeringSame topicProsthetics and Rehabilitation RoboticsFrench-language works237,207