ArticleBiomimetics (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Model Predictive Control with Optimal Modelling for Pneumatic Artificial Muscle in Rehabilitation Robotics: Confirmation of Validity Though Preliminary Testing.
Article in Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Advances in Biomimetics: Patents from Nature.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Multi-Threshold Remote Sensing Image Segmentation Based on Improved Black-Winged Kite Algorithm.Biomimetics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents a model predictive controller (MPC) based on dynamic models generated using the Particle Swarm Optimisation method for accurate motion control of a pneumatic artificial muscle (PAM) for application in rehabilitation robotics. The physical compliance and lightweight nature of PAMs make them desirable for use in the field but also introduce nonlinear dynamic properties which are difficult to accurately model and control. As well as the MPC, three other control systems were examined for a comparative study: a particle-swarm optimised proportional-integral-derivative controller (PSO-PID), an iterative learning controller (ILC), and classical PID control. A series of different waveforms were used as setpoints for each controller, including addition of external loading and simulated disturbance, for a system consisting of a single PAM. Based on the displacement error measured for each experiment, the PID controller performed worst with the largest error values and an issue with oscillating about the setpoint. PSO-PID performed better but still poorly compared with the other intelligent controllers, as well as still exhibiting oscillation, which is undesirable in any human-robot interaction as it can heavily impact the comfort and safety of the system. ILC performed well with rapid convergence to steady-state and low-error values, as well as mitigation of loads and disturbance; however, it performed poorly under changing frequency of input. MPC generally performed the best of the controllers tested here, with the lowest error values and a rapid response to changes in setpoint, as well as no required learning period due to the predictive algorithm.
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.