A Multi-Objective Trajectory Planning Method for Collaborative Robot
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>Aiming at the characteristics of high efficiency and smoothness in the motion process of collaborative robot, a multi-objective trajectory planning method is proposed. Firstly, the kinematics model of the collaborative robot is established, and the trajectory in the workspace is converted into joint space trajectory using inverse kinematics method. Secondly, seven-order B-spline functions are used to construct joint trajectory sequences to ensure the continuous position, velocity, acceleration and jerk of each joint. Then, the trajectory competitive multi-objective particle swarm optimization (TCMOPSO) algorithm is proposed to search the Pareto optimal solutions set of the robot’s time-energy-jerk optimal trajectory. Further, the normalized weight function is proposed to select the appropriate solution. Finally, the algorithm simulation experiment is completed in MATLAB, and the robot control experiment is completed using the Robot Operating System (ROS). The experimental results show that the method can achieve effective multi-objective optimization, the appropriate optimal trajectory can be obtained according to the actual requirements, and the collaborative robot is actually operating well.</p>
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".