MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408044708 · doi:10.1139/tcsme-2024-0064

An end-effector for polishing based on a parallel mechanism with 3-PSS + PS′

2025· article· en· W4408044708 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Youyu Liu, Wei Ping, Songsong Lu

Bibliographic record

VenueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAdvanced Surface Polishing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolishingMechanism (biology)EffectorComputer sciencePhysicsControl theory (sociology)EngineeringMechanical engineeringChemistryControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To enable a polishing tool to automatically adjust its posture and adapt to the surface of the workpiece, an end-effector based on a parallel mechanism with 3-PSS + PS′ (prismatic–spherical–spherical + prismatic–sphere–pin) was designed by using the reverse adaptive working principle. Based on the spiral theory, the degrees of freedom (DOF) of the mobile platform in the parallel mechanism are analyzed, and its DOF are verified according to the modified Grübler–Kutzbach formula. According to the kinematic analysis, the relationship between the plunger movement distance and the grinding wheel spatial pose is determined. The polishing force function between the grinding wheel and workpiece is obtained according to the analysis of the spatial pose of the grinding wheel. The main structural dimensions of the model were determined, and the physical model was given. The simulation analysis of the designed structure is carried out; the results show that the end-effector can realize 3-DOF motion. The maximum rotation angle of the grinding wheel around the x-axis and y-axis is 7.68° and 6.68°, respectively, which meets the design requirements. Within the working range, without controlling the end of a manipulator, the grinding wheel can adaptively compensate the trajectory error, and for different materials 45 steel, HT-200, 6061, the polishing force fluctuation is within 2.56% after stable polishing, which is basically constant.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.225
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransactions of the Canadian Society for Mechanical EngineeringSame topicAdvanced Surface Polishing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207