MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409882786 · doi:10.1109/lra.2025.3565124

Closed-Loop Shape-Forming Control of a Magnetic Soft Continuum Robot

2025· article· en· W4409882786 on OpenAlexaff
Vittorio Francescon, Nikita Murasovs, Peter Lloyd, Onaizah Onaizah, Damith Suresh Chathuranga, Pietro Valdastri

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicSoft Robotics and Applications
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersEuropean Research CouncilEngineering and Physical Sciences Research CouncilNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsLoop (graph theory)Control theory (sociology)PhysicsClosed loopComputer scienceControl (management)MathematicsControl engineeringArtificial intelligenceEngineeringCombinatorics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Continuum manipulators are frequently employed in endoluminal interventions, however, a lack of softness and dexterity in standard manipulators can risk trauma during navigation and limit reachable workspace. Magnetically actuated Soft Continuum Robots (MSCRs) offer enhanced miniaturization potential and reduced rigidity due to their external actuation. Magnetizations pertaining only to the tip of the robot offer a limited range of deformation options where more versatile MSCRs can be embedded with distinct, lengthwise magnetization profiles. These full-body bespoke profiles allow the robots to form pre-determined shapes under actuation. Here we propose an approach to model and control MSCR behavior in closed-loop. We employ this system to achieve shape forming navigations subject to variations in initial conditions. To validate our methodology, we conduct experiments using a 50 mm long by 1.8 mm diameter MSCR navigating through a soft phantom from the tip of a duodenoscope. The proposed system is capable of rejecting variations in the angle at which the MSCR is inserted. We employed homogeneous magnetic fields for actuation and closed-loop vision-based control to manipulate the lengthwise body shape of our MSCR. The performance of this closed-loop approach is compared with an open loop counterpart, which fails in all but one navigation attempts into the pancreatic duct.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.803
Threshold uncertainty score0.614

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicSoft Robotics and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207