MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400483064 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2023-0155

Experimental evaluation of a small-sized continuum robot for grasping tasks

2024· article· en· W4400483064 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Ali Mehrkish, Farrokh Janabi‐Sharifi

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsRobotComputer scienceSimulationArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explores catheters, small-sized continuum robots (CRs), in medical procedures, utilizing a recently developed comprehensive classification system known as the “CR-based taxonomy”. This work specializes the proposed taxonomy for small-sized CRs with medical applications through semi-structured interviews with researchers in this field. Subsequently, it provides a comprehensive analysis of grasp taxonomy, encompassing aspects such as grasp stability, grasp adaptability, and the inherent characteristics of manipulated objects and tasks. This analysis is conducted within the context of the “CR-based taxonomy” to assess its feasibility in a practical scenario involving a small-sized CR. Based on this analysis, fixed-tip grasp, hook grasp, and power form closure grasp (PFG) with a grasp stability of 18 have the highest stability, while platform/pull/push grasp and expandable grasp have the lowest stability. Moreover, PFG and precision multi-contact grasp have superior adaptability compared to other grasp families. Also, the planar payload of selected grasp families is much higher than the spatial payload of those families; however, the grasp size remains equal for both dimensions. This endeavor lays the groundwork for more in-depth investigations into catheter applications and offers valuable guidance to medical device developers in the creation of enhanced medical instruments.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.975
Threshold uncertainty score0.467

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207