Towards Autonomous Programming of Micro-Assembly Robotics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Due to the strive towards miniaturized systems and the growing field of optical technologies, micro-assembly is becoming increasingly important. Micro-assembly is characterized by challenging processes that require sub-micron level positioning accuracy regardless of modeling and calibration errors in the manipulator system. Automating these processes requires not only profound expertise about the process itself but also highly skilled personnel for programming the micro-assembly robot since current interfaces lack intuitive programming methods and simulation capabilities. In this paper, we outline a roadmap towards autonomous programming by combining intuitive programming approaches with intelligent and self-learning algorithms. Following this roadmap, the user will be supported progressively by autonomous and intelligent sub-processes until the machine can finally program itself autonomously. Based on a systematic review of the current state of automated micro-assembly and simulation frameworks, we show the capabilities of current approaches and identify key enablers for an autonomous assembly. From these enablers, we derive modules building our proposed framework. Central aspects are the development of a holistic simulation and a data management, which include not only the robot with its sensor systems but also assembly-components. These form the foundation for offline programming and the usage of machine learning algorithms. In order to facilitate future research, we propose the utilization of the Robot Operating System 2 framework (ROS2) as a basis for autonomous programming adhering the principles of open-source and enabling seamless integration.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".