ArticleIEEE robotics and automation letters2024
Toward Extending Concentric Tube Robot Kinematics for Large Clearance and Impulse Curvature.
Article in IEEE robotics and automation letters, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Concentric Tube Robots (CTRs) have been proposed to operate within the unstructured environment for minimally invasive surgeries. In this letter, we consider the operation scenario where the tubes travel inside the channels with a large clearance or large curvature, such as aortas or industrial pipes. Accurate kinematic modeling of CTRs is required for the development of motion planning and control within these operation scenarios. To this end, we extended the conventional CTR kinematics model to a more general case with large tube-to-tube clearance and large centerline curvature. Numerical simulations and experimental validations are conducted to compare our model with respect to the conventional CTR kinematic model. In the physical experiments, our proposed model achieved a tip position error of 1.53 mm in the 2D planer case and 3.86 mm in 3D case, outperforming the state-of-the-art model by 71% and 61%, respectively.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.