MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391320396 · doi:10.1002/rob.22295

Design and Motion Principle Analysis of new parallel mechanisms with fewer active inputs than the degrees of freedom

2024· article· en· W4391320396 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Wang, Can Qiu, Zhiyong Wu, Yundou Xu, Fengfeng Xi, Shenglong Nie, Yongsheng Zhao

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Field Robotics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsKinematicsDegrees of freedom (physics and chemistry)ActuatorControl theory (sociology)Inverse kinematicsMotion (physics)Inverse dynamicsInverseScrew theoryComputer scienceEngineeringMathematicsArtificial intelligenceControl (management)GeometryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In this paper, two new parallel mechanisms (PMs) with fewer active inputs than the degrees of freedom (DOFs)are proposed: (i) an nSPS (n = 7, 8, 9) six‐DOF PM with n‐6 active inputs and six lockable joints. and (ii) a 3RPS‐SPS 3‐DOF PM with one active input and three lockable joints. Compared with the traditional PMs, the difference is that the proposed PMs can achieve the same mobility by using a minimal number of active joints. Moreover, the load‐carrying capacity is also improved compared with the original standard mechanisms, since the new PMs become statically redundant when all the branches are locked. For this purpose, a sequential motion control principle is introduced that requires both inverse and forward kinematics of PMs. Kinematic modeling, dimensional optimization, and structural design are carried out for the 7SPS and 3RPS‐SPS mechanisms, and the two prototypes are constructed for experimental validation. Both simulation and experiment results have shown that the proposed hybrid PM can achieve the original mobility while significantly reducing the number of actuators.

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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Field RoboticsSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207