Design, Prototyping and Control of Low-Impedance Hybrid Robots forIntuitive Physical Human-Robot Interaction
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the past decades, parallel mechanisms have found applications in many areas including motion simulation, highspeed robots, machine-tools and cable-driven systems, to name a few.More recently, parallel and hybrid robots have been proposed in the emerging field of physical human-robot interaction (pHRI) which aims at taking advantage of the complementary capabilities of robots and humans.One of the key challenges in pHRI is to provide an intuitive physical interaction to the human user.Due to their low moving inertia, parallel robots can be used advantageously to design lowimpedance mechanical interfaces in order to increase the mechanical bandwidth of the human-robot interaction, thereby leading to a very intuitive behaviour.In this presentation, the use of parallel and hybrid robots in the design of pHRI devices is proposed and examples of prototypes developed at Laval University are shown.The use of kinematic redundancy in order to increase the rotational workspace is also discussed.The results clearly demonstrate the capability of parallel mechanisms to provide high interaction bandwidth for pHRI robots.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it