Integrating Impedance Control and Nonlinear Disturbance Observer for Robot-Assisted Arthroscope Control in Elbow Arthroscopic Surgery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Robot-assisted arthroscopic surgery is transforming the tradition in orthopaedic surgery. Compliance and stability are essential features that a surgical robot must have for safe physical human-robot interaction (PHRI). Surgical tools attached at the robot end-effector and human-robot interaction will affect the robot dynamics inevitably. This could undermine the utility and stability of the robotic system if the varying robot dynamics are not identified and updated in the robot control law. In this paper, an integrated frame-work for robot impedance control and nonlinear disturbance observer (NDOB)-based compensation of uncertain dynamics is proposed, where the former ensures compliant robot behavior and the latter compensates for dynamic uncertainties when necessary. The combination of impedance controller and NDOB is analyzed theoretically in three scenarios. A complete simulation and experimental studies involving three common conditions are then conducted to evaluate the theoretical analyses. A preliminary$p$HRI application on arthroscopic surgery is designed to implement the proposed framework on a robotic surgeonassist system and evaluate its effectiveness experimentally. By integrating impedance controller with NDOB, the proposed framework allows an accurate impedance control when dynamic model inaccuracy and external disturbance exist.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".