MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Stiffness Adaptation of a Hybrid Soft Surgical Robot for Improved Safety in Interventional Surgery

2022· article· en· W4295434359 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 44th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine & Biology Society (EMBC) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStiffnessRobotKinematicsHyperelastic materialTendonSoft roboticsDisplacement (psychology)Computer scienceSimulationControl theory (sociology)EngineeringMechanical engineeringMaterials scienceBiomedical engineeringStructural engineeringFinite element methodPhysicsSurgeryArtificial intelligenceClassical mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Minimally invasive instruments are inserted per-cutaneously and are steered toward the desired anatomy. The low stiffness of instruments is an advantage; however, once the target is reached, the instrument usually is required to transmit force to the environment. The main limitation of the constant stiffness is predetermined maneuverability and cap of force transmission. Whereas, a highly flexible device can be safely steered through the body but is not suitable for payload limit, while a highly stiff device can have relatively high loads but cannot be steered in highly tortuous trajectories. To overcome this limitation, an adaptive stiffness soft robot was proposed, and the effects of the chamber pressure on the stiffness of the soft robot were investigated. To this end, a single-chamber pneumatic soft robot with one tendon was designed and fabricated. Afterward, a continuum mechanics model based on the nonlinear Cosserat rod model with hyperelastic material model and large deformation kinematics of the robot was developed. The shooting method solved the model as a boundary value problem with Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions. The results of the model showed stiffness adaptation feasibility with simultaneous tendon-driving and pneumatic actuation. Thus, to validate the theoretical findings, a series of experimental studies were performed with pressure in the range of 33 to 44 kPa and tendon tensions in the range of 0 to 2.7 N. The theoretical and experimental results for tip displacement and stiffness showed similar trends with a maximum error of 8.25%.

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.

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 score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score0.627

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.245 · 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