MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Time-Aware Non-Uniform Rational Basis Spline (T-NURBS)

2024· article· en· W4402263651 on OpenAlexaff
Yazan M. Al-Rawashdeh, Marcel Heertjes, Mohammad Al Janaideh

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Numerical Analysis Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpline (mechanical)Computer scienceBasis (linear algebra)AlgorithmMathematicsGeometryEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Explicitly adopting time as a parameter, the defi-nition of non-uniform rational basis spline profile known short as NURBS is revisited and updated. This results in another NURBS definition that is aware of time, and not only the geometry. Also, it can jointly exist as-is at the CAD-CAM side, and at the motion numeric controller side without resorting to segmentation, curve fitting, and interpolation techniques usually used when extracting motion information from the standard geometric NURBS profiles. This gives rise to the notion of “what you see is what you get” when the proposed NURBS definition is used. First, working at the jerk signal level and by using quadratic polynomials with time as the independent variable, quintic polynomials are obtained at the position level and are smoothly glued together to form the needed basis functions that facilitate introducing time-aware splines. Similarly, the trigonometric sine function is used to define another set of time-aware basis functions. Second, and as with standard NURBS, the herein-defined time-aware splines are extended and put into the rational polynomial form such that the proposed time-aware NURBS structure is revealed. Despite being normalized, the time signature used to define the basis functions persists once velocity, acceleration, and jerk profiles are obtained. At the level of the coefficient, these kinematical quantities are neatly written using vector notation that- with the aid of a developed algorithm- reduces the computation burden at the motion numeric controller side during real-time execution. This results in a smooth motion with reduced feed rate variation while adhering to any imposed kinematical constraints. The usefulness, and simplicity of the proposed approach is mainly demonstrated through numeric simulation where the proposed concept of “what you see is what you get” is verified.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.002

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.236
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAdvanced Numerical Analysis TechniquesFrench-language works237,207