Investigating Quantum Artificial Neural Networks for Singularity Avoidance in Robotic Manipulators
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explores the application of quantum-inspired neural networks (QNNs) to address the inverse kinematics problem in robotic arms, explicitly focusing on the ABB IRB140, an articulated robot arm with six degrees of freedom. The primary objective is to develop a quantum-inspired activation function for multilayer perceptron (MLP) neural networks. The study evaluates their performance in avoiding singularities by comparing artificial neural networks (ANNs) with quantum neural networks (QNNs). The findings demonstrate that QNNs outperform ANNs in terms of mean absolute error (MAE), achieving a 15.60% lower MAE in the model without singularities and a 16.67% reduction in the Jacobian-based MAE in the model designed to avoid singularities. The study demonstrates that QNNs offer superior accuracy in predicting the robot arm's inverse kinematics, achieving a position error of 1.64 mm and an orientation error of 0.00179 radians while effectively avoiding singularities. These outcomes underscore the potential of quantum-inspired neural networks to enhance robotic arm manipulations' precision, efficiency, and performance.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".