Quantum-Inspired Sliding-Mode Control to Enhance the Precision and Energy Efficiency of an Articulated Industrial Robotic Arm
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Maintaining precise and robust control in robotic systems, particularly those with nonlinear dynamics and external disturbances, is a significant challenge in robotics. Sliding-mode control (SMC) is a widely used technique to tackle these issues; however, it is plagued by chattering and computational complexity, which limit its effectiveness in high-precision environments. This study aims to develop and assess a quantum-inspired sliding-mode control (QSMC) strategy to enhance the SMC’s robustness, precision, and computational efficiency, specifically in controlling a six-jointed articulated robotic arm. The methodology involves creating a comprehensive kinematic and dynamic model of the robot, followed by implementing both classic SMC and the proposed Q-SMC in a comparative way. The simulation results confirm that the Q-SMC method outperforms the classic SMC, particularly in reducing chattering, improving tracking accuracy, and decreasing energy consumption by approximately 3.79%. These findings suggest that the Q-SMC technique provides a promising alternative to classical control methods, with potential applications in tasks requiring high precision and efficient robotic manipulations.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".