MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415178895 · doi:10.1109/tsmc.2025.3616513

Adaptive Control for End-Effector Exoskeleton Robots With Unknown Dynamics and Actuator Parameters

2025· article· en· W4415178895 on OpenAlexaff
Brahim Brahmi, Maarouf Saad

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics Systems · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicStroke Rehabilitation and Recovery
Canadian institutionsÉcole de Technologie Supérieure
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBacksteppingExoskeletonControl theory (sociology)ActuatorRobotController (irrigation)Lyapunov functionAdaptive controlStability (learning theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Exoskeleton robots hold immense promise in rehabilitation, serving as crucial aids for patient mobility and exercise. However, harnessing their capabilities requires overcoming significant control challenges arising from complex nonlinear dynamics and uncertainties in both models and actuators. This article introduces a novel adaptive backstepping controller designed specifically for exoskeleton robots navigating uncertain dynamics and actuator parameters. Unlike conventional approaches that rely on basis functions, the proposed controller (PL) integrates a modified function approximation technique (MFAT) to approximate dynamic parameters without the need for such functions. The MFAT effectively manages mismatched perturbations, while the backstepping control compensates for uncertainties associated with state variables, enhancing resilience to disturbances, especially in scenarios where the exoskeleton’s dynamics model is unknown. The Lyapunov stability analysis ensures uniformly ultimately bounded (UUB) signals within the closed-loop system. A comparative study conducted on the industrial robot IRB 120 validates the effectiveness of the PL and highlights its superior performance. Real-time implementation on a seven degrees of freedom (DOFs) wearable robot named ETS-MARSE confirms the efficiency of the control algorithm. The results from simulations and experiments underscore the efficacy of the proposed approach. The insights gained from this article pave the way to unlocking the full potential of exoskeleton robots in rehabilitation settings, promising improved patient outcomes and advancing human-technology interaction to new heights.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.715
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Transactions on Systems Man and Cybernetics SystemsSame topicStroke Rehabilitation and RecoveryFrench-language works237,207