MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388231133 · doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-3495635/v1

Guidelines to design a neural network as a feedforward controller for fast trajectory tracking of robotic arms

2023· preprint· en· W4388231133 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch Square · 2023
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsPolytechnique Montréal
FundersInstitut de Valorisation des Données
KeywordsFeed forwardTrajectoryController (irrigation)Computer scienceArtificial neural networkControl theory (sociology)Tracking (education)Feedforward neural networkRobotic armControl engineeringArtificial intelligenceControl (management)Engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Tracking fast and accurate trajectories of robotic arms can be important in applications involving large movements, velocities, and accelerations. This would require either an accurate dynamic model of the arm or an aggressive tracking with high-gain feedback. Concretely, it can be difficult to obtain the accurate model, due to nonlinearities and uncertainties. Current developments of 3D-printed and low-cost robotic arms accentuate this issue. Control architectures for high-speed trajectory tracking requiring no dynamic model were recently proposed. These consist in learning the dynamic response of a proportional derivative controller with a neural network (NN) as feedforward controller. However, no detail was provided to make the most of these architectures. This paper aims to provide guidelines for an optimal design of a neural network (NN) as feedforward controller for fast and accurate trajectory tracking of robotic arms. The subsequent objective is to compare 1. one NN per individual joint (INN’s method); and 2. one global NN (GNN method). The method compares these two architectures. Results are illustrated with two serial robotic arms of 3 and 5 degrees of freedom, simulated then in reality. The main results are as follows: The control architecture reduces the trajectory tracking errors (RMSE < 2°). The INN’s method can be used when the joints dynamics are decoupled and requires less data than GNN method to learn the dynamics. A table sums up the guidelines for design, in five main steps. Perspectives are to apply these guidelines to develop low-cost robotic arms and extend to micro-movements.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.206
GPT teacher head0.419
Teacher spread0.213 · 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