MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415598468 · doi:10.1115/detc2025-169703

A Mobile Welding Robot for Extreme Conditions

2025· article· W4415598468 on OpenAlexaff
Reza Fotouhi, Qianwei Zhang, Ehsan Soltan

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicMechatronics Education and Applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRobot weldingWeldingRoboticsMobile robotRobotProcess (computing)Flexibility (engineering)Inertial measurement unit

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Welding is an important step in the manufacturing process of many products, yet traditional welding still requires intensive human labor and field welding in cold weather makes it more challenging. As robotic systems advance, they have become viable technologies for automating manufacturing processes in welding. Nevertheless, most existing robotic welding systems still rely on stationary robots and teach-playback programming mode. These limit the flexibility and adaptability of the robotic systems and requiring human intervention for setup, adjustments, and monitoring. Mobile manipulators have attracted researchers to incorporate into the robotics field owing to their variety of real-world applications, and mobile welding is one of the feasible applications. To address these limitations, a mobile welding robot (MWR) system is being developed for laboratory and field settings. This MWR system is equipped with a UGV (unmanned ground vehicle) with several sensors such as, LiDAR and an Inertial Measurement Unit (IMU), a six degree-of-freedom (DOF) robot manipulator, a 3D stereo camera, a flux core welder, and an onboard computer. The welding robot system is designed to navigate on uneven floors and outdoor construction sites autonomously, acquire 3D point cloud data of the workpiece, identify and segment the weld seams, perform automated manipulator path planning, and execute welding tasks with minimal human intervention. This research contributes to the field of robotic welding by developing an autonomous solution capable of operating in different environments, including laboratories, industry workshops, and outdoor with extreme weather conditions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMechatronics Education and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207