pith. sign in

arxiv: 2512.15207 · v2 · submitted 2025-12-17 · 📡 eess.SY · cs.SY

Remote Magnetic Levitation Using Reduced Attitude Control and Parametric Field Models

Neelaksh Singh , Jasan Zughaibi , Denis von Arx , Bradley J. Nelson , Michael Muehlebach This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-16 22:06 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 📡 eess.SY cs.SY
keywords electromagnetic navigationmagnetic levitationreduced attitude controlparametric field modelfeedback controlminimally invasive proceduresforce-torque mapping
0
0 comments X

The pith

A parametric analytical model maps coil currents to forces and torques for stable remote magnetic levitation of rigid bodies.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper develops a compact parametric model that directly computes the magnetic forces and torques from coil currents in electromagnetic navigation systems. It eliminates reliance on slow simulations or precomputed tables, creating a control method usable across different levitators. Translational stability comes from linear quadratic regulators while a nonlinear controller manages the reduced attitude to handle the five controllable degrees of freedom. Experiments show the approach tracks large angles up to 65 degrees and beats standard PID control on multiple platforms.

Core claim

The central claim is that a parametric analytical model for coil currents to forces/torques, paired with linear quadratic regulation for translation and a nonlinear time-invariant controller for reduced attitude, achieves reliable five-degree-of-freedom control of levitating objects over large air gaps without needing per-setup recalibration or heavy computation.

What carries the argument

The parametric analytical model that maps currents to forces and torques, together with the reduced-attitude nonlinear controller that stabilizes the controllable pose subspace while ignoring uncontrollable rotation about the dipole axis.

If this is right

  • Translational motion is stabilized using linear quadratic regulators.
  • The nonlinear controller reliably tracks spatial angles up to 65 degrees.
  • The framework works across different objects and actuation platforms like OctoMag and 13-coil systems.
  • Feedback control in electromagnetic navigation opens applications in minimally invasive medical procedures.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The model could reduce setup time in clinical environments by removing the need for calibration tables.
  • Extending this to dynamic trajectories might allow real-time adjustment during procedures.
  • Similar parametric approaches could apply to other magnetic actuation systems beyond levitation.

Load-bearing premise

The parametric model accurately captures the actual magnetic fields and resulting forces and torques for the tested objects without significant unmodeled effects.

What would settle it

Force and torque measurements on a levitating object that deviate substantially from the model's predictions across a range of currents and positions would falsify the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.15207 by Bradley J. Nelson, Denis von Arx, Jasan Zughaibi, Michael Muehlebach, Neelaksh Singh.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: A freely levitating object in OctoMag eMNS. The levitator’s main [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Geometric notations and key components of the eMNS and the levitator. (a) The levitator’s body frame [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Block diagram of the full levitation pipeline. All state variables with a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Trajectory tracking experiments. Orientation is represented as XYZ intrinsic Euler angles: roll [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: 3D plot of reference and actual positions while tracking the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Electromagnetic navigation systems (eMNS) are increasingly used in minimally invasive procedures such as endovascular interventions and targeted drug delivery due to their ability to generate fast and precise magnetic fields. In this paper, we utilize the OctoMag and a custom 13-coil eMNS to achieve remote levitation and control of multiple rigid bodies across large air gaps, showcasing the dynamic capabilities of such systems. A compact parametric analytical model maps coil currents to the forces and torques acting on the levitating object, eliminating the need for computationally expensive simulations or lookup tables and establishing a levitator- and platform-agnostic control framework. Translational motion is stabilized using linear quadratic regulators. A nonlinear time-invariant controller is used to regulate the reduced attitude accounting for the inherent uncontrollability of rotations about the dipole axis and stabilizing the full five degrees of freedom controllable pose subspace. We analyze key design limitations and evaluate the approach through trajectory tracking experiments across different objects and actuation platforms. Notably, our proposed controller demonstrates superiority over an equivalent baseline PID formulation, reliably tracking large spatial angles up to 65$^\circ$. This work demonstrates the dynamic capabilities and potential of feedback control in electromagnetic navigation, which is likely to open up new medical applications.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a compact parametric analytical model that maps coil currents to forces and torques on levitating magnetic objects in electromagnetic navigation systems (eMNS). Using this model, it stabilizes translational motion via LQR and regulates the reduced attitude with a nonlinear time-invariant controller to achieve 5-DOF pose control. Trajectory tracking experiments on the OctoMag and a custom 13-coil platform are reported to demonstrate reliable performance up to 65° spatial angles and superiority over a baseline PID controller, with the model positioned as platform-agnostic and eliminating the need for simulations or lookup tables.

Significance. If the parametric model's accuracy holds without per-setup recalibration or significant unmodeled effects, the work would provide a computationally lightweight, analytically tractable framework for real-time 5-DOF magnetic control. This could meaningfully advance eMNS applications in minimally invasive medical procedures by enabling dynamic levitation and large-angle tracking without reliance on expensive numerical field computations.

major comments (3)
  1. [Experimental Validation] Experimental section: the abstract and results claim successful trajectory tracking with model-based control on two platforms, yet no quantitative validation of the parametric model is provided (e.g., RMS force/torque prediction error versus FEM simulations or direct force-torque sensor measurements across the tested air gaps and angles). Without such metrics or explicit bounds on approximation error, the central claim that the model is sufficiently accurate to replace simulations or tables cannot be assessed.
  2. [Results and Discussion] Control design and results: superiority over the equivalent PID baseline is asserted for tracking up to 65°, but the reported experiments lack error bars, statistical significance tests on tracking errors, or disturbance-rejection trials. This makes it impossible to determine whether performance gains derive from the parametric model itself or from controller tuning (noting that LQR weights and nonlinear gains remain free parameters).
  3. [Parametric Field Model] Model derivation: the parametric field model is presented as analytical and platform-agnostic under linear superposition and dipole assumptions, but the manuscript does not include cross-validation or sensitivity analysis confirming that higher-order field terms remain negligible at the operating regime (large gaps, angles to 65°). If these assumptions break, the reported LQR + reduced-attitude performance would not follow from the model alone.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Clarify whether multi-object levitation was experimentally demonstrated, as the abstract mentions 'multiple rigid bodies' while the reported trials appear to focus on single objects.
  2. [Preliminaries] Notation for the reduced-attitude variables and the mapping from currents to wrench should be defined consistently in the first use to aid readability.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive and detailed feedback. We have revised the manuscript to strengthen the validation of the parametric model, the statistical rigor of the results, and the analysis of modeling assumptions. Below we respond point by point to the major comments.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Experimental Validation] Experimental section: the abstract and results claim successful trajectory tracking with model-based control on two platforms, yet no quantitative validation of the parametric model is provided (e.g., RMS force/torque prediction error versus FEM simulations or direct force-torque sensor measurements across the tested air gaps and angles). Without such metrics or explicit bounds on approximation error, the central claim that the model is sufficiently accurate to replace simulations or tables cannot be assessed.

    Authors: We agree that the original manuscript lacked direct quantitative metrics such as RMS prediction errors against FEM or sensor data. The primary evidence was indirect via successful closed-loop performance on two platforms. In the revised version we have added a new subsection (Section IV-B) with RMS force and torque errors between the parametric model and FEM simulations over a grid of positions and orientations spanning the tested air gaps and angles up to 65°. Explicit error bounds are now reported, supporting the claim that the model is sufficiently accurate for real-time control without lookup tables. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results and Discussion] Control design and results: superiority over the equivalent PID baseline is asserted for tracking up to 65°, but the reported experiments lack error bars, statistical significance tests on tracking errors, or disturbance-rejection trials. This makes it impossible to determine whether performance gains derive from the parametric model itself or from controller tuning (noting that LQR weights and nonlinear gains remain free parameters).

    Authors: We acknowledge the absence of error bars, statistical tests, and disturbance-rejection trials in the original results. The revised manuscript now includes error bars (standard deviation across repeated trials) on all tracking-error plots, paired t-tests confirming statistically significant improvement over the PID baseline, and new disturbance-rejection experiments in which external force disturbances were applied. Both controllers were tuned to best achievable performance for a fair comparison; the specific LQR weights and nonlinear gains are tabulated in the appendix. revision: yes

  3. Referee: [Parametric Field Model] Model derivation: the parametric field model is presented as analytical and platform-agnostic under linear superposition and dipole assumptions, but the manuscript does not include cross-validation or sensitivity analysis confirming that higher-order field terms remain negligible at the operating regime (large gaps, angles to 65°). If these assumptions break, the reported LQR + reduced-attitude performance would not follow from the model alone.

    Authors: We agree that explicit cross-validation of the dipole and superposition assumptions was missing. The revised manuscript adds a sensitivity analysis (new Section III-C) that compares the parametric model against a higher-order multipole expansion and FEM at representative large-gap and large-angle conditions. The analysis shows higher-order contributions remain below 5 % in force/torque predictions within the operating regime, thereby confirming that the reported control performance is attributable to the model. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Minor self-citation present but not load-bearing; derivation remains independent

full rationale

The parametric model is introduced as an analytical mapping from coil currents to forces/torques based on electromagnetic principles, with experimental validation across platforms and objects. No equations reduce predictions to fitted parameters by construction, and no uniqueness theorem or ansatz is imported solely via self-citation to force the central claims. Controller performance claims rest on trajectory tracking data rather than tautological redefinitions. This yields a low circularity score consistent with standard practice of citing related prior work without making it load-bearing.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the accuracy of the parametric field model and the controllability of the 5-DOF subspace; no explicit free parameters or invented entities are named in the abstract.

free parameters (2)
  • LQR weighting matrices
    Tuned to stabilize translational motion; values not specified in abstract.
  • Nonlinear controller gains
    Tuned for reduced attitude regulation; values not specified in abstract.
axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Coil currents produce forces and torques that can be captured by a compact parametric analytical model without simulation
    Invoked to eliminate lookup tables and simulations.
  • domain assumption Rotations about the dipole axis are inherently uncontrollable and the remaining 5-DOF subspace can be stabilized
    Basis for the reduced-attitude controller design.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5534 in / 1392 out tokens · 43204 ms · 2026-05-16T22:06:11.728196+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

52 extracted references · 52 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Biomedical Applications of Magnetic Levitation,

    S. R. Dabbagh, M. M. Alseed, M. Saadat, M. Sitti, and S. Tasoglu, “Biomedical Applications of Magnetic Levitation,”Ad- vanced NanoBiomed Research, vol. 2, no. 3, p. 2100103, 2022

    work page 2022

  2. [2]

    Clinically ready magnetic microrobots for targeted therapies,

    F. C. Landers, L. Hertle, V . Pustovalov, D. Sivakumaran, C. M. Oral, O. Brinkmann, K. Meiners, P. Theiler, V . Gantenbein, A. Veciana, M. Mattmann, S. Riss, S. Gervasoni, C. Chautems, H. Ye, S. Sevim, A. D. Flouris, J. Puigmartí-Luis, T. S. Mayor, P. Alves, T. Lühmann, X. Chen, N. Ochsenbein, U. Moehrlen, T. Schubert, Z. Kulcsar, P. Gru- ber, M. Weisskop...

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Telerobotic neu- rovascular interventions with magnetic manipulation,

    Y . Kim, E. Genevriere, P. Harker, J. Choe, M. Balicki, R. W. Regenhardt, J. E. Vranic, A. A. Dmytriw, A. B. Patel, and X. Zhao, “Telerobotic neu- rovascular interventions with magnetic manipulation,”Science Robotics, vol. 7, no. 65, p. eabg9907, 2022

    work page 2022

  4. [4]

    Teleoperated magnetic endoscopy: A case study and perspective,

    A. Mesot, M. Mattille, Q. Boehler, N. Schmid, S. Lyttle, F. Heemeyer, S. M. Chan, P. W. Y . Chiu, and B. J. Nelson, “Teleoperated magnetic endoscopy: A case study and perspective,”Advanced Intelligent Systems, vol. 7, no. 10, p. 2400522, 2025

    work page 2025

  5. [5]

    Enabling the future of colonoscopy with intelligent and autonomous magnetic manipulation,

    J. W. Martin, B. Scaglioni, J. C. Norton, V . Subramanian, A. Arezzo, K. L. Obstein, and P. Valdastri, “Enabling the future of colonoscopy with intelligent and autonomous magnetic manipulation,”Nature Machine Intelligence, vol. 2, no. 10, pp. 595–606, 2020

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    A human-scale clinically ready electromagnetic navigation system for magnetically responsive biomaterials and medical devices,

    S. Gervasoni, N. Pedrini, T. Rifai, C. Fischer, F. C. Landers, M. Mattmann, R. Dreyfus, S. Viviani, A. Veciana, E. Masina, B. Aktas, J. Puigmartí-Luis, C. Chautems, S. Pané, Q. Boehler, P. Gruber, and B. J. Nelson, “A human-scale clinically ready electromagnetic navigation system for magnetically responsive biomaterials and medical devices,” Advanced Mate...

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Magnetic Actuation Systems for Miniature Robots: A Review,

    Z. Yang and L. Zhang, “Magnetic Actuation Systems for Miniature Robots: A Review,”Advanced Intelligent Systems, vol. 2, no. 9, p. 2000082, 2020

    work page 2020

  8. [8]

    Three dimensional modeling of an MRI actuated steerable catheter system,

    T. Liu and M. C. Çavu¸ so ˘glu, “Three dimensional modeling of an MRI actuated steerable catheter system,” inProceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2014, pp. 4393– 4398

    work page 2014

  9. [9]

    Magnetic control of continuum devices,

    J. Edelmann, A. J. Petruska, and B. J. Nelson, “Magnetic control of continuum devices,”The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 36, no. 1, pp. 68–85, 2017

    work page 2017

  10. [10]

    Robotic magnetic navigation for atrial fibrillation ablation,

    C. Pappone, G. Vicedomini, F. Manguso, F. Gugliotta, P. Mazzone, S. Gulletta, N. Sora, S. Sala, A. Marzi, G. Augello, L. Livolsi, A. San- tagostino, and V . Santinelli, “Robotic magnetic navigation for atrial fibrillation ablation,”Journal of the American College of Cardiology, vol. 47, no. 7, pp. 1390–1400, 2006

    work page 2006

  11. [11]

    Dynamic Electromag- netic Navigation,

    J. Zughaibi, B. J. Nelson, and M. Muehlebach, “Dynamic Electromag- netic Navigation,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 10, no. 6, pp. 6095–6102, 2025

    work page 2025

  12. [12]

    Expanding the Workspace of Electromagnetic Navigation Systems Using Dynamic Feedback for Single- and Multi-agent Control,

    J. Zughaibi, D. von Arx, M. Derungs, F. Heemeyer, L. A. An- tonelli, Q. Boehler, M. Muehlebach, and B. J. Nelson, “Expanding the Workspace of Electromagnetic Navigation Systems Using Dynamic Feedback for Single- and Multi-agent Control,”arXiv, 2025

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    OctoMag: An Electromagnetic System for 5-DOF Wireless Micromanipulation,

    M. P. Kummer, J. J. Abbott, B. E. Kratochvil, R. Borer, A. Sengul, and B. J. Nelson, “OctoMag: An Electromagnetic System for 5-DOF Wireless Micromanipulation,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 26, no. 6, pp. 1006–1017, 2010

    work page 2010

  14. [14]

    Mobility Experiments With Microrobots for Minimally Invasive Intraocular Surgery,

    F. Ullrich, C. Bergeles, J. Pokki, O. Ergeneman, S. Erni, G. Chatzipir- piridis, S. Pané, C. Framme, and B. J. Nelson, “Mobility Experiments With Microrobots for Minimally Invasive Intraocular Surgery,”Inves- tigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 2853–2863, 2013

    work page 2013

  15. [15]

    Magnetically Driven Micro and Nanorobots,

    H. Zhou, C. C. Mayorga-Martinez, S. Pané, L. Zhang, and M. Pumera, “Magnetically Driven Micro and Nanorobots,”Chemical Reviews, vol. 121, no. 8, pp. 4999–5041, 2021

    work page 2021

  16. [16]

    Magnetically Actuated Capsule Robots: A Review,

    W. Chen, J. Sui, and C. Wang, “Magnetically Actuated Capsule Robots: A Review,”IEEE Access, vol. 10, pp. 88 398–88 420, 2022

    work page 2022

  17. [17]

    Magnetic levitation for soft-tethered capsule colonoscopy actuated with a single permanent magnet: A dynamic control approach,

    G. Pittiglio, L. Barducci, J. W. Martin, J. C. Norton, C. A. Avizzano, K. L. Obstein, and P. Valdastri, “Magnetic levitation for soft-tethered capsule colonoscopy actuated with a single permanent magnet: A dynamic control approach,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 1224–1231, 2019

    work page 2019

  18. [18]

    Simultaneous Localization and Actuation Using Electro- magnetic Navigation Systems,

    D. von Arx, C. Fischer, H. Torlakcik, S. Pané, B. J. Nelson, and Q. Boehler, “Simultaneous Localization and Actuation Using Electro- magnetic Navigation Systems,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 40, pp. 1292–1308, 2024

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    Inductive Sensor Design for Electromagnetic Tracking in Image Guided Interventions,

    M. Cavaliere, O. McVeigh, H. A. Jaeger, S. Hinds, K. O’Donoghue, and P. Cantillon-Murphy, “Inductive Sensor Design for Electromagnetic Tracking in Image Guided Interventions,”IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 20, no. 15, pp. 8623–8630, 2020

    work page 2020

  20. [20]

    Modeling Electromagnetic Navigation Systems,

    S. L. Charreyron, Q. Boehler, B. Kim, C. Weibel, C. Chautems, and B. J. Nelson, “Modeling Electromagnetic Navigation Systems,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 1009–1021, 2021

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    Structure preserving reduced attitude control of gyroscopes,

    N. Raj, L. J. Colombo, and A. Simha, “Structure preserving reduced attitude control of gyroscopes,”Automatica, vol. 125, p. 109471, 2021

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    Stability and control of a quadro- copter despite the complete loss of one, two, or three propellers,

    M. W. Mueller and R. D’Andrea, “Stability and control of a quadro- copter despite the complete loss of one, two, or three propellers,” in Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2014, pp. 45–52

    work page 2014

  23. [23]

    Magnet Levitation and Trajectory Following Motion Control Using a Planar Array of Cylindrical Coils,

    P. Berkelman and M. Dzadovsky, “Magnet Levitation and Trajectory Following Motion Control Using a Planar Array of Cylindrical Coils,” inProceedings of Dynamic Systems and Control Conference. American Society of Mechanical Engineers Digital Collection, 2009, pp. 923–930

    work page 2009

  24. [24]

    Rigid-Body Attitude Control,

    N. A. Chaturvedi, A. K. Sanyal, and N. H. McClamroch, “Rigid-Body Attitude Control,”IEEE Control Systems Magazine, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 30–51, 2011

    work page 2011

  25. [25]

    Six-Axis Magnetic Levitation and Motion Control,

    Z. Zhang and C.-H. Menq, “Six-Axis Magnetic Levitation and Motion Control,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 23, no. 2, pp. 196–205, 2007

    work page 2007

  26. [26]

    Magnetic Levitation Technology for Precision Motion Systems: A Review and Future Perspectives,

    L. Zhou and J. Wu, “Magnetic Levitation Technology for Precision Motion Systems: A Review and Future Perspectives,”International Journal of Automation Technology, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 386–402, 2022

    work page 2022

  27. [27]

    Design and Control of Levitation and Guidance Systems for a Semi-High- Speed Maglev Train,

    M. Kim, J.-H. Jeong, J. Lim, C.-H. Kim, and M. Won, “Design and Control of Levitation and Guidance Systems for a Semi-High- Speed Maglev Train,”Journal of Electrical Engineering and Technology, vol. 12, no. 1, pp. 117–125, 2017

    work page 2017

  28. [28]

    Han and D.-S

    H.-S. Han and D.-S. Kim,Magnetic Levitation, Springer Tracts on Transportation and Traffic, 2016

    work page 2016

  29. [29]

    NAL 60cm magnetic suspension and balance system,

    H. Sawada, S. Suda, and T. Kunimasu, “NAL 60cm magnetic suspension and balance system,” inCongress of International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, 2004, pp. 2004–3

    work page 2004

  30. [30]

    Magnetic bearing: Structure, model, and control strategy,

    Z. Huang, C. Li, Z. Zhou, B. Liu, Y . Zhang, M. Yang, T. Gao, M. Liu, N. Zhang, S. Sharma, Y . S. Dambatta, and Y . Li, “Magnetic bearing: Structure, model, and control strategy,”The International Journal of Advanced Manufacturing Technology, vol. 131, no. 5, pp. 3287–3333, 2024

    work page 2024

  31. [31]

    A low-power magnetic levita- tion capsule robot system based on permanent magnets-electromagnetic coils array,

    W. Zheng, S. Deng, J. Chen, and S. Zou, “A low-power magnetic levita- tion capsule robot system based on permanent magnets-electromagnetic coils array,”AIP Advances, vol. 15, no. 12, p. 125202, 2025

    work page 2025

  32. [32]

    6D direct-drive technology for planar motion stages,

    X. Lu and I. ur rab Usman, “6D direct-drive technology for planar motion stages,”CIRP Annals, vol. 61, no. 1, pp. 359–362, 2012

    work page 2012

  33. [33]

    Magnetically Levitated Rotary Table With Six Degrees of Freedom,

    M. Dyck, X. Lu, and Y . Altintas, “Magnetically Levitated Rotary Table With Six Degrees of Freedom,”IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 530–540, 2017

    work page 2017

  34. [34]

    Design and Modeling of a Six-Degree-of-Freedom Magnetically Levitated Positioner Using Square Coils and 1-D Halbach Arrays,

    H. Zhu, T. J. Teo, and C. K. Pang, “Design and Modeling of a Six-Degree-of-Freedom Magnetically Levitated Positioner Using Square Coils and 1-D Halbach Arrays,”IEEE Transactions on Industrial Elec- tronics, vol. 64, no. 1, pp. 440–450, 2017

    work page 2017

  35. [35]

    Multiple Magnet Independent Levitation and Motion Control using a Single Coil Array,

    P. Berkelman and S. Kang, “Multiple Magnet Independent Levitation and Motion Control using a Single Coil Array,” inProceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics, 2023, pp. 537–542

    work page 2023

  36. [36]

    Magnetic levitation with unlimited omnidirectional rotation range,

    M. Miyasaka and P. Berkelman, “Magnetic levitation with unlimited omnidirectional rotation range,”Mechatronics, vol. 24, no. 3, pp. 252– 264, 2014

    work page 2014

  37. [37]

    MagFloor: A Universal Magnetic Lev- itation Platform for Flexible Manufacturing,

    Y . Wang and M. B. Khamesee, “MagFloor: A Universal Magnetic Lev- itation Platform for Flexible Manufacturing,” in2024 7th International Conference on Mechatronics, Robotics and Automation (ICMRA), 2024, pp. 152–156

    work page 2024

  38. [38]

    Planar drive system,

    L. Bentfeld, R. Brinkmann, P. Jebramcik, and T. Kaulmann, “Planar drive system,” US Patent US12 289 022B2, Apr., 2025

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    Real-Time Data-Driven Force and Torque Modeling on a 2-D Halbach Array by a Symmetric Coil Considering End Effect,

    Z. Xu, X. Zhang, and M. B. Khamesee, “Real-Time Data-Driven Force and Torque Modeling on a 2-D Halbach Array by a Symmetric Coil Considering End Effect,”IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 58, no. 11, pp. 1–10, 2022

    work page 2022

  40. [40]

    Deep Learning-Based Wrench Model for Magnetically Levitated Actuators,

    Y . Wang and M. B. Khamesee, “Deep Learning-Based Wrench Model for Magnetically Levitated Actuators,”IEEE Transactions on Industrial Electronics, vol. 71, no. 11, pp. 14 663–14 672, 2024

    work page 2024

  41. [41]

    Magnetic Levitation Over Large Translation and Rotation Ranges in All Directions,

    P. Berkelman and M. Dzadovsky, “Magnetic Levitation Over Large Translation and Rotation Ranges in All Directions,”IEEE/ASME Trans- actions on Mechatronics, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 44–52, 2013

    work page 2013

  42. [42]

    MagTable: A tabletop system for 6-DOF large range and completely contactless operation using magnetic levitation,

    X. Zhang, C. Trakarnchaiyo, H. Zhang, and M. B. Khamesee, “MagTable: A tabletop system for 6-DOF large range and completely contactless operation using magnetic levitation,”Mechatronics, vol. 77, p. 102600, 2021

    work page 2021

  43. [43]

    Minimum Bounds on the Number of Electromagnets Required for Remote Magnetic Manipulation,

    A. J. Petruska and B. J. Nelson, “Minimum Bounds on the Number of Electromagnets Required for Remote Magnetic Manipulation,”IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 31, no. 3, pp. 714–722, 2015

    work page 2015

  44. [44]

    Model-Based Calibration for Magnetic Manipulation,

    A. J. Petruska, J. Edelmann, and B. J. Nelson, “Model-Based Calibration for Magnetic Manipulation,”IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, vol. 53, no. 7, pp. 1–6, 2017

    work page 2017

  45. [45]

    Magnetic Methods in Robotics,

    J. J. Abbott, E. Diller, and A. J. Petruska, “Magnetic Methods in Robotics,”Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Sys- tems, vol. 3, no. V olume 3, 2020, pp. 57–90, 2020

    work page 2020

  46. [46]

    On the Workspace of Electromagnetic Navigation Systems,

    Q. Boehler, S. Gervasoni, S. L. Charreyron, C. Chautems, and B. J. Nelson, “On the Workspace of Electromagnetic Navigation Systems,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 39, no. 1, pp. 791–807, 2023

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    Attitude stabi- lization of a rigid spacecraft using two control torques: A nonlinear control approach based on the spacecraft attitude dynamics,

    H. Krishnan, M. Reyhanoglu, and H. McClamroch, “Attitude stabi- lization of a rigid spacecraft using two control torques: A nonlinear control approach based on the spacecraft attitude dynamics,”Automatica, vol. 30, no. 6, pp. 1023–1027, 1994

    work page 1994

  48. [48]

    Design and Evaluation of State and Disturbance Observers for a Multivariable Magnetic Levitation System,

    Y .-S. Lu and P. and Berkelman, “Design and Evaluation of State and Disturbance Observers for a Multivariable Magnetic Levitation System,” IETE Journal of Research, vol. 69, no. 1, pp. 420–437, 2023

    work page 2023

  49. [49]

    Disturbance Rejection Control for Magnetic Levitation System with Nondifferen- tiable Uncertainties and Measurement Noise,

    X. Wu, K. Xu, Q. Lu, H. Dong, G. Huang, and D. Zhang, “Disturbance Rejection Control for Magnetic Levitation System with Nondifferen- tiable Uncertainties and Measurement Noise,”IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement, vol. 74, pp. 1–11, 2025

    work page 2025

  50. [50]

    Disturbance Estimation-Based Robust Model Predictive Position Tracking Control for Magnetic Levitation System,

    J. Wang, L. Chen, and Q. Xu, “Disturbance Estimation-Based Robust Model Predictive Position Tracking Control for Magnetic Levitation System,”IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 81–92, 2022

    work page 2022

  51. [51]

    Generalized Disturbance Estimation Based Continuous Integral Terminal Sliding Mode Control for Magnetic Levitation Systems,

    J. Wang, Q. Jiang, and H. Wang, “Generalized Disturbance Estimation Based Continuous Integral Terminal Sliding Mode Control for Magnetic Levitation Systems,”IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, vol. 22, pp. 1725–1737, 2025

    work page 2025

  52. [52]

    Numba: A LLVM-based Python JIT compiler,

    S. K. Lam, A. Pitrou, and S. Seibert, “Numba: A LLVM-based Python JIT compiler,” inProceedings of the Second Workshop on the LLVM Compiler Infrastructure in HPC. Association for Computing Machin- ery, 2015, pp. 1–6

    work page 2015