MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409883015 · doi:10.1109/tsmc.2025.3561241

Robust AI-Driven Target-Object-Free Hybrid Vision/Force Control of Industrial Robotic Systems

2025· article· en· W4409883015 on OpenAlexaff
Ehsan Zakeri, Wenfang Xie

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicImage Processing Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtificial intelligenceObject (grammar)Computer scienceControl engineeringComputer visionMachine visionRoboticsIndustrial robotRobotEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article introduces a robust AI-driven hybrid vision/force control (HVFC) method for industrial robots. The proposed HVFC method exploits Superpoint, a pretrained deep convolutional neural network (DCNN), as the AI agent to extract interest points for image-based visual servoing (IBVS), making it a target-object-free method. This tackles the limited workspace issue of eye-in-hand robots interacting with a workpiece due to the short distance between the camera and the workpiece, including a target object or landmarks. A learning-by-demonstration (LBD) method is also developed to generate the desired interest points associated with the desired path on the workpiece for interaction. To handle the issue of a high and variable number of interest points for use in IBVS, a set of six independent image features is extracted from the detected interest points, resulting in an invertible image interaction matrix, leading to global stability and a robust control process. To perform HVFC, a hierarchical orthogonal sliding manifold is defined, allowing force control in the normal direction and IBVS in the rest. Further, a filtered terminal integral sliding-mode controller is developed to stabilize the manifold, resulting in high tracking accuracy and robust performance against uncertainties and measurement noises. The experimental results of polishing and sanding the surfaces of a flat plastic board, a wooden airplane propeller, and a metal pegboard demonstrate the feasibility and superiority of the proposed HVFC-LBD method over conventional counterparts in terms of workspace expansion, robustness, and tracking accuracy.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.994
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.209 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics SystemsSame topicImage Processing Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207