MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403442593 · doi:10.1016/j.mfglet.2024.09.005

Fusion IK: Solving inverse kinematics using a hybridized deep learning and evolutionary approach

2024· article· en· W4403442593 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed M. Azab, Sherif Saad

Bibliographic record

VenueManufacturing Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverse kinematicsArtificial intelligenceKinematicsInverseComputer scienceMachine learningMathematicsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Inverse kinematics is a core aspect of robot manipulation. This paper presents an approach to solving Inverse Kinematics (IK) for robots, including articulated industrial ones, combining deep learning with an evolutionary algorithm. Fusion IK passes the manipulator’s target and current joint values into a neural network, the results of which are then used to seed an evolutionary algorithm, Bio IK, to complete the solution of the inverse kinematics problem. Fusion IK allows for solving the position and orientation of the robot while attempting to minimize joint movement times. Comparisons between Fusion IK and its underlying algorithm Bio IK are tested on a six-degree-of-freedom articulated industrial robot as well as a 20-degree-of-freedom robot to explore the move times that Fusion IK produces. The comparisons show that the variations of the Fusion IK algorithm show comparable results to its underlying evolutionary Bio IK algorithm on a six-degrees-of-freedom articulated robot and improvements on a 20-degree-of-freedom robot without any additional hyperparameter tuning. The results show that Fusion IK could be of real value regarding the movement time and the quality of the obtained solutions upon further research, especially with higher degree-of-freedom robots.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueManufacturing LettersSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207