Dual-Loop neural prediction– based trajectory tracking control for robotic arms


Abstract

With the rapid growth of intelligent manufacturing, robotic arm trajectory tracking control faces challenges of high precision and fast response. Existing control methods suffer from lagging parameter convergence, loss of prediction accuracy at single time scales, and other issues when dealing with joint coupling nonlinearity, load mutations, and impact disturbances, resulting in large tracking errors and insufficient real-time response performance. To this end, a robotic arm trajectory tracking control model was proposed based on dual-loop neural prediction. First, a collaborative prediction mechanism of inner and outer dual-loop neural networks is constructed. The inner loop network captures the system's nonlinear dynamics in real time and performs short-term trajectory prediction. In contrast, the outer loop network performs long-term trend prediction and systematic error compensation based on historical data and environmental feedback. Second, an online learning strategy based on prediction error gradients is designed to accelerate parameter convergence and enhance the system's adaptability to external disturbances. Finally, a fusion control framework combining neural prediction and traditional control is constructed, achieving a balance between computational efficiency and control accuracy through the complementary and coordinated functions of global optimization and local stability guarantee. Experimental results show that our model achieves 0.82mm tracking accuracy on the LASA dataset and 0.91mm on the RoboSet dataset, with response times of 12.3ms and 14.2ms, respectively, significantly outperforming existing methods. The disturbance rejection capability reaches 42.7% and 39.8%, demonstrating excellent robustness, while maintaining computational efficiency improvements of 16.8% and 14.3% respectively.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].