MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395955884 · doi:10.18280/jesa.570210

Enhanced Ball Trajectory Tracking Using Visual Servoing with 2-DOF Ball on Plate Balancing System

2024· article· en· W4395955884 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal Européen des Systèmes Automatisés · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicIterative Learning Control Systems
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVisual servoingBall (mathematics)Computer visionArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceTrajectoryTracking (education)Control theory (sociology)MathematicsRobotGeometryPhysicsPsychologyControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Accurate tracking of ball trajectories on a platform using a 2-DOF balancer system poses significant challenges in the existing literature due to its inherent nonlinearity and instability.This research addresses these challenges through a two-fold approach.Firstly, we focus on designing a robust 2-DOF ball balancer system model.Secondly, we perform a comparative study of three control techniques: Linear Quadratic Regulator-based Proportional (LQR_P), Full State Feedback-based Proportional (FSF_P), and Classical Proportional Derivative-based Proportional (PD_P) control.To evaluate the effectiveness of the designed controllers, we conduct both simulation and experimental tests using MATLAB Simulink integrated with Quarc software and the 2DOF ball balancer system Quanser hardware.The results demonstrate that the Linear Quadratic Regulator-based proportional control exhibits superior performance in terms of transient response, including percentage overshoot, settling time, and peak time.Moreover, it showcases excellent steady-state response, achieving a minimum steady-state error of 0.641mm, outperforming the other techniques investigated in this study.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.229 · 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