MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386902776 · doi:10.1109/mra.2023.3310858

Synthesis, Design, and Experimental Validation of an Agile Wrist for Enhanced Grasping and Manipulation in Cluttered Environments: An Experimental Evaluation With a Challenging Pick-and-Place Task

2023· article· en· W4386902776 on OpenAlexaff
Jérémy Begey, Arda Yiğit, Clément Gosselin

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgile software developmentTask (project management)SMT placement equipmentComputer scienceTrajectoryRobotArtificial intelligenceComputer visionWristHuman–computer interactionSimulationMotion (physics)EngineeringSystems engineeringSoftware engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In many practical cases, such as in logistics applications, grasping and manipulation of objects must be carried out in confined spaces with obstacles. Limited room is then available to maneuver, and robotic devices can lack dexterity or be impaired by their size when performing in such cluttered environments. In this article, we address this issue by proposing a novel agile wrist based on a rolling joint with a ± 180° range of motion (ROM). This wrist is designed to maneuver in confined spaces and in particular access hard-to-reach areas through entry apertures, while allowing the use of constraining grasping methods, such as scooping. The architecture of this device is discussed, and a prototype is built. A dedicated trajectory planning strategy based on a virtual center of motion is proposed, and an experimental evaluation with a challenging pick-and-place task is carried out.

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)0.001
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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics & Automation MagazineSame topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207