MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409427391 · doi:10.1109/lra.2025.3560887

A Predictor-Corrector Algorithm for the Fast Determination of the Wrench-Feasible Workspace of Cable-Driven Parallel Robots

2025· article· en· W4409427391 on OpenAlexafffund
A. Abrous, Philippe Cardou

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Mechanisms and Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsWrenchWorkspaceRobotPredictor–corrector methodComputer scienceAlgorithmParallel manipulatorEngineeringArtificial intelligenceStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we present a method of determining the Constant-Orientation Wrench-Feasible Workspace (COWFW) of Cable-Driven Parallel Robots (CDPRs). This workspace is a critical property of CDPRs, as their reach is often limited by their ability to sustain required forces and moments while keeping their cable tensions within acceptable limits. Several manners of determining the COWFW are reported in the literature, among which the brute force method is probably the most popular, the easiest to implement and the slowest, as it consists in determining wrench-feasibility at a grid of points covering the workspace. On the other hand, the ray-tracing method implemented in WireX software is probably the fastest method available; It consists in sampling the COWFW boundary by performing line-searches from a common starting point along predetermined, evenly-spaced directions. The method proposed in this paper is the application to CDPRs of a predictor-corrector algorithm used in computer graphics to quickly sample implicit surfaces In this work, the implicit surface is defined by equating to zero the “capacity margin” an index developed by one of the authors. The predictor-corrector algorithm then “marches” over the implicit surface, triangulating it as it advances. Simulation results show that the determination of the COWFW surface by this technique can be faster than the ray-tracing method in at least some examples, and often yields a triangulation that is more regular. We should note, however, that the implementation of this method is more demanding, it requiring more lines of code than the ray-tracing method.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.091
Threshold uncertainty score0.322

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.205 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicRobotic Mechanisms and DynamicsFrench-language works237,207