MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Workspace Control of Free-Floating Space Manipulators with Non-Zero Momentum on Lie Groups

2022· article· en· W4294690754 on OpenAlexaff
Patrick Rousso, Robin Chhabra

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 American Control Conference (ACC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSpace Satellite Systems and Control
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)WorkspaceEuclidean groupKinematicsFeedback linearizationLie groupFeed forwardMathematicsController (irrigation)PID controllerLie algebraMomentum (technical analysis)Euclidean spaceCenter of mass (relativistic)Computer sciencePhysicsMathematical analysisEngineeringAffine spaceControl engineeringGeometryClassical mechanicsArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Pure mathematicsRobotAffine transformation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper develops an output-tracking controller to control the end-effector pose of an N-link free-floating space manipulator, with non-zero momentum. The space manipulator is modelled as an open-chain multi-body system and its kinematics and dynamics are derived on the Special Euclidean group SE(3). Using the conservation of linear and angular momentum of the system, the dynamics of the space manipulator is carefully reduced. The input-output linearization of the system is performed on the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{s}\mathfrak{e}(3)$, without adopting any local coordinate chart for the SE(3). Coordinate-free pose and velocity error functions on SE(3) are then employed to define a modified feedforward, feedback PID control law to stabilize the end-effector pose to a feasible trajectory. A simulation example is provided to demonstrate the tracking capabilities of the proposed controller.

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)0.000
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.176 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 American Control Conference (ACC)Same topicSpace Satellite Systems and ControlFrench-language works237,207