REVIEW 2 cited by
A Proper Definition of Higher Order Rigidity
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
[Connelly and Servatius, 1994] shows the difficulty of properly defining n-th order rigidity and flexiblity of a bar-and-joint framework for higher order (n >= 3) through the introduction of a cusp mechanism. The author proposes a "proper" definition of the order of rigidity by the order of elongation of the bars with respect to the arclength along the path in the configuration space. We show that the classic definition using formal n-th derivative of the length constraint is a sufficient condition for the n-th flexiblity in the proposed definition and also a necessary condition only for n = 1, 2.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Higher Order Rigidity and Energy
A framework's rigidity order, defined by energy growth, is energy-independent and equals a maximum over higher-order flexes, yielding new proofs of second-order and dim-one higher-order rigidity.
-
Second-order prestress stability and third-order rigidity of polyhedral surfaces
No fractional rigidity orders occur before third order, and second-order prestress stability can be checked by explicit linear-algebra criteria, but a general third-order test exists only when the rigidity matrix has ...
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.