Modeling of an Automatic Excavation Mechanism for a Parallelepiped Foundation - Application in Building Construction Preparation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foundation excavation and general earthworks are activities that involve the machine operator in a series of repetitive and tedious operations, suggesting opportunities for automation through by the introduction of robotic technologies with subsequent improvements in the design and machine use, especially, in dangerous environments working. Automation of excavation operations can be realized by an automatically controlled excavator system that is able to perform autonomously a planned digging work. In this study, a modeling of an excavation mechanism has been represented, where the purpose is to automatically excavate a parallelepiped-shaped foundation. From existing excavation machinery in the industry, the manipulator arm of a backhoe was chosen to do the modeling. Starting from the basic input geometric parameters of the foundation to be excavated, the system gives as outputs results: A simulation of the various mechanism components movement, in addition to the automatic excavation trajectory of the parallelepiped foundation. Finally, from the soils properties of the western region of Algeria that they were measured experimentally, a resistance simulation of the various components of the mechanism was carried, to test the reliability of the mechanism in terms of deformation and Von Mises stress.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".