Next Article in Journal
Wind-Wave Synergistic Triboelectric Nanogenerator: Performance Evaluation Test and Potential Applications in Offshore Areas
Previous Article in Journal
Aptasensor Integrated with Two-Dimensional Nanomaterial for Selective and Sensitive Electrochemical Detection of Ketamine Drug
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Review of Single-Cell Microrobots: Classification, Driving Methods and Applications
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Continuum Robots and Magnetic Soft Robots: From Models to Interdisciplinary Challenges for Medical Applications

by
Honghong Wang
1,*,†,
Yi Mao
2,† and
Jingli Du
1,*
1
School of Mechano-Electronic Engineering, Xidian University, Xi’an 710071, China
2
School of Chemical and Material Engineering, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
These authors contributed equally to this work.
Micromachines 2024, 15(3), 313; https://doi.org/10.3390/mi15030313
Submission received: 31 January 2024 / Revised: 17 February 2024 / Accepted: 23 February 2024 / Published: 24 February 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Magnetic Actuation for Micromachines)

Abstract

:
This article explores the challenges of continuum and magnetic soft robotics for medical applications, extending from model development to an interdisciplinary perspective. First, we established a unified model framework based on algebra and geometry. The research progress and challenges in principle models, data-driven, and hybrid modeling were then analyzed in depth. Simultaneously, a numerical analysis framework for the principle model was constructed. Furthermore, we expanded the model framework to encompass interdisciplinary research and conducted a comprehensive analysis, including an in-depth case study. Current challenges and the need to address meta-problems were identified through discussion. Overall, this review provides a novel perspective on understanding the challenges and complexities of continuum and magnetic soft robotics in medical applications, paving the way for interdisciplinary researchers to assimilate knowledge in this domain rapidly.

1. Introduction

In ancient times, the carriage was mainly dedicated to the nobles, and the wheels were manufactured from rigid materials. They lacked comfort and were expected to be available for ordinary families. However, after the invention of flexible rubber materials and internal combustion engines, new transportation, such as cars and bicycles, quickly entered the homes of ordinary people. Similarly, although most rigid robots are currently limited to factory applications, these rigid robots have large structures and potential safety hazards. With the development of new materials and driving technology, soft robots applications are like changes in traditional transportation [1,2,3,4,5]. In recent years, the study of soft robotics has garnered widespread attention, primarily focusing on applications in medical fields [6,7], underwater robotics [8,9,10,11,12], manipulation and grasping [13,14], space exploration [15], and operations in confined spaces [16,17,18,19]. Given the diverse range of soft robots, this paper primarily concentrates on applying continuum robots (the robot structure has a flexible continuum backbone (Figure 1(1-0a)) or an equivalent continuum backbone) and magnetic soft robots (robots embedding magnetic media in soft materials (Figure 1(1-0b))) in medical settings (Figure 1(1-1)).
Since the concept of continuum robots was first proposed in the Amadeus deep-sea research project [20,21], significant progress has been made in this field [22,23,24,25]. This paper focuses on tendon-driven (Figure 1(1-2a)) [26,27], multi-rod-driven (Figure 1(1-2b)) [28,29,30], and concentric tube actuation (Figure 1(1-2c)) [31,32,33] applied in medical continuum configurations, as well as composite continuum configurations [34,35,36,37,38] or magnetic soft robots (Figure 1(1-2d,e)) formed by these basic components. In the medical field, continuum robots, due to their compliant configurations, have attracted widespread attention in endoscopic and catheter-based interventional surgeries. Researchers from different disciplines have proposed various solutions based on their expertise. From a technical perspective, this includes structure [39] and manufacturing [40], modeling [41,42], sensing [43,44,45], trajectory tracking [46,47], control strategies [48,49,50], state estimation [51], stability analysis [52], and applications [53,54]. From the viewpoint of the discipline, this encompasses mechanical engineering [55], computer science [56], materials [57,58,59,60], chemistry [61], biology [62], and medicine [63]. Although the gap between academia and applied fields is constantly widening, extensive research across interdisciplinary has laid a solid foundation for the rapid application of continuum robots.
Magnetic soft robots [64,65,66], as an emerging subfield within the science of soft robots, have garnered attention for their remarkable controllability and flexibility of movement driven by magnetic fields [67,68]. It is particularly suitable for microcatheter interventional treatments (Figure 1(1-3a–e)) [69,70] or those constrained by extreme environments [71]. In the medical field, these robots have revolutionized the sector with their exquisite control capabilities, enabling in situ monitoring [72], precise drug delivery [73,74], and targeted navigation [75], thereby significantly enhancing the accuracy and effectiveness of treatments [76]. However, their applications extend far beyond this. Owing to their structural programmability [77,78,79], magnetic soft robots also exhibit vast potential in fields like logistics automation [80] and environmental monitoring [81,82]. With designs that prevent the need for complex electrical connections and the ability to operate in tight or hard-to-reach spaces, these robots offer a unique and effective solution for specific, challenging application scenarios.
Continuum and magnetic soft robots, although both categorized within the realm of soft robots, display unique differences and complementary features in their design philosophies, application domains, and technical realizations. From a design standpoint, continuum robots emphasize structural continuity and flexibility, adapting to various complex and constrained environments [39]. In contrast, magnetic soft robots rely on magnetic fields for control, particularly suited for remote or contactless operation scenarios [83]. In the application sphere, continuum robots, due to their exceptional flexibility and adaptability, find widespread use in medical, disaster relief, and deep-sea exploration fields. Magnetic soft robots, conversely, excel in precise control aspects like catheter intervention [84] and targeted drug delivery [85]. Technologically, continuum robots primarily depend on intricate mechanical structures and power systems, such as tendon or rod actuation, posing significant manufacturing challenges at sub-millimeter scales. On the other hand, magnetic soft robots function through external magnetic fields and magnetic materials, offering solutions that can reach sub-millimeter and even micro to nano levels [25]. Despite their distinct differences, both share commonalities and potential for cross-application, including pursuing higher degrees of freedom, more complex motion patterns, and shared challenges in sensing and control algorithms.
Continuum and magnetic soft robots represent two significant branches within medical robotics, each distinguished by their unique actuation methods and potential applications. Despite the extensive literature available for each type of robot within their respective research domains, there is a notable absence of a comprehensive review that compares and synthesizes them within a unified framework. This paper addresses this gap by exploring the interrelationship and potential complementarity between continuum and magnetic soft robots from a modeling perspective. We aim to facilitate interdisciplinary research methodologies and pioneer new avenues of study through a comprehensive analysis of these two robotic systems. We hope this integrated analysis will provide fresh insights and inspirations for technological innovation and practical applications in medical robotics.
This review mainly explores the interdisciplinary applications of continuum and magnetic soft robots from the perspective of models. In this article’s second and third parts, we focus on technical analysis and build a unified theoretical framework for continuum and magnetic soft robot models layer by layer from the perspectives of topology and group theory (i.e., algebra and geometry). This involves not only the models themselves, but also their strong connection to multiple disciplines. The fourth part turns to interdisciplinary analysis, exploring the critical role of models in interdisciplinary intersections, showing the complexity and importance of solving interdisciplinary problems, and how these models can be extended from specific problems to broader subject areas. The fifth part uses the case analysis method to deeply examine the strategies and methods of Professor Zhao’s team in multi-disciplinary comprehensive research, emphasizing the core value of inter-discipline in promoting scientific and technological progress and expanding application fields. Finally, in the discussion and conclusion sections, we will summarize and reflect on the importance and future potential of continuum and magnetic soft robotics in interdisciplinary environments to comprehensively present our research results and perspectives.
Figure 1. Continuum robots (CR) and magnetic soft robots (MSR) for human medical applications. (1-0) The basic configuration of continuum and magnetic soft robots is to initially understand the principles of motion; (a) the introduction is the basic configuration of the motion deformation of the continuum robot; (b) the introduction is the basic configuration of the motion deformation of the magnetic soft robot. (1-1) The sites of action of continuum and magnetic soft robots for applications in human surgery. (1-2) The innovative applications of these robotic technologies in medicine, heralding new possibilities in treatment and diagnosis (comprising (a) [86], (b) [87], (c) [35], (d) [25], and (e) [88], which are reprinted images), further concentrating on several prominent robotic models in the medical sector. The structural type of these robots is the focus of our discussion. (1-3) The application of continuum and magnetic soft robots in major human organ surgeries (a) in cardiovascular disease surgery; (b) in cerebrovascular disease; (c) in capillary disease; (d) in pulmonary and tracheal disease; (e) in aortic and venous vascular disease.
Figure 1. Continuum robots (CR) and magnetic soft robots (MSR) for human medical applications. (1-0) The basic configuration of continuum and magnetic soft robots is to initially understand the principles of motion; (a) the introduction is the basic configuration of the motion deformation of the continuum robot; (b) the introduction is the basic configuration of the motion deformation of the magnetic soft robot. (1-1) The sites of action of continuum and magnetic soft robots for applications in human surgery. (1-2) The innovative applications of these robotic technologies in medicine, heralding new possibilities in treatment and diagnosis (comprising (a) [86], (b) [87], (c) [35], (d) [25], and (e) [88], which are reprinted images), further concentrating on several prominent robotic models in the medical sector. The structural type of these robots is the focus of our discussion. (1-3) The application of continuum and magnetic soft robots in major human organ surgeries (a) in cardiovascular disease surgery; (b) in cerebrovascular disease; (c) in capillary disease; (d) in pulmonary and tracheal disease; (e) in aortic and venous vascular disease.
Micromachines 15 00313 g001

2. Continuum Robots

We elucidate the modeling methodologies of continuum and magnetic soft robots through illustrative diagrams and mathematical expressions. This includes exploring principles, data, and hybrid modeling techniques and simplifying the complexity of interdisciplinary integration.

2.1. Principle Modeling

Modeling continuum robots is a multifaceted and multi-dimensional challenge. From the perspective of handling the unit structural form, continuum robot modeling can be primarily categorized into several approaches: Cosserat rod theory [89,90,91,92] for micropolar bodies, piecewise constant curvature (PCC) models [23], arc segment models [93], geometrically finite element methods [94], and modal methods [95,96]. Micropolar and finite element approaches are more suited for describing complex nonlinear deformations in continuum robots. At the same time, PCC and arc segment models are better tailored for rapid calculation and control in engineering applications of continuum robots.
Although the Cosserat rod approach, PCC, arc segment models, and modal methods differ in their names and forms of representation, they essentially serve as distinct simplification methods for addressing the same problem. Viewed from the perspectives of group theory and topology [97,98,99], these methods all aim to describe the position and orientation of continuum robots at specific points. Consequently, the kinematic description of continuum robots is fundamentally consistent with that of rigid robots. The particular expressions are as follows:
C = g : X 0 , 1 g X S E ( 3 )
In the context of continuum robot modeling, g S E ( 3 ) encompasses both the position p ( X , t ) and orientation R ( X , t ) . Precisely depicting the robot’s orientation, including its position and direction, is undoubtedly a central aspect of modeling. Various orientation representation methods, such as rotation matrices, Euler angles, unit quaternions, screw theory [100], and Plücker coordinates, each possess their distinct advantages, limitations, and applicability [101]. The actual choice depends on multiple factors, including the complexity of the application environment and available computational resources. These representation methods can be interconverted through mathematical transformations in certain intricate application scenarios, offering enhanced flexibility. A common method of orientation conversion is presented below:
R = exp ( θ K ^ ) = I + sin ( θ ) K ^ + ( 1 cos ( θ ) ) ( K ^ ) 2
Although rotation matrices are excellent for their intuitiveness, they can be computationally and storage-intensive, which may become a limiting factor in applications of continuum robots requiring real-time control and dynamic simulation. In contrast, Euler angles are easy to understand and implement, but can introduce unnecessary restrictions and complexities in describing complex orientation changes due to the gimbal lock issue. Unit quaternions and screw theory [102,103], within the mathematical framework of Lie groups and Lie algebras, offer more precise and efficient methods for describing the complex motions and configurations of continuum and magnetic soft robots. Lie groups and Lie algebras facilitate a lossless mapping from nonlinear to linear, providing profound and refined mathematical insights into this problem.
From an interdisciplinary perspective, selecting an appropriate method for orientation representation involves a decision-making process that spans multiple dimensions and levels. This decision affects the accuracy and complexity of the model and significantly influences the design of subsequent control algorithms and the optimization of the overall system. Therefore, when making this decision, it is imperative to consider various technical and application factors comprehensively. This interdisciplinary and multi-faceted approach not only aids in advancing fundamental research in continuum robots, but also provides solid theoretical support for their application in various practical scenarios.
In the discussion above, we have detailed the rigid description of robot kinematics. However, given the significant compliance and adaptability of continuum robots, constructing their nonlinear dynamic equations necessitates particular attention to accurately handling the constitutive relations of compliance. In this context, Poincaré’s new dynamics equations provide a critical theoretical framework [104]. Following the criterion of continuity for partial derivatives, t X = X t , we can derive the compatibility equations for continuum robots:
X η = ad ξ η + t ξ
We have ad ξ η = [ ξ , η ] = ξ η η ξ . Observing equations from a temporal or spatial perspective reveals that the velocity field variable η can be expressed as the strain field variable ξ , independent of time t. Building upon Equation (3), it is essential to establish the relationship between strain ξ and the generalized coordinates q . Solid mechanics [105] provides the theoretical underpinning for this relationship. The relationship of the generalized coordinates q can be represented as follows:
q = Φ ( X ) ξ
where Φ ( X ) is the basis function. To capture the dynamic behavior of continuum robots in complex environments and under the influence of various forces, the kinematic model of continuum robots can be described using the Euler–Lagrange equation or Hamiltonian equation, based on the generalized coordinates q . This kinematic model can be represented as:
M ( q ) q ¨ + C ( q , q ˙ ) q ˙ + G ( q ) = τ R
In this context, M ( q ) represents the mass matrix, C ( q , q ˙ ) denotes the Coriolis term, G ( q ) signifies the gravitational term, and τ R is the input torque. Equation (5) establishes a more general dynamic equation for continuum robots. To delve deeper into the analysis and synthesis of continuum robots, it is imperative to transform their dynamic model Equation (5) into a first-order Hamiltonian form. This transformation is beneficial for comprehending the fundamental characteristics of the system, but also serves as a powerful mathematical tool for further control and optimization endeavors.
X ˙ = f ( X )
In the realm of multibody dynamics modeling, the process is often complex. Specifically, for tendon-driven, multi-rod-driven, and magnetic drive continuum and magnetic soft robots, it becomes necessary to incorporate the descriptions of tendons, rods, or magnetic fields, and establish their relationships with the generalized coordinates. Furthermore, additional elements may need to be considered to develop a more comprehensive dynamical model. For instance, tendons [106], multi-rod [107] and magnetic [108] elements. Sometimes, introducing Lagrangian multipliers, as suggested in [109], is required to accurately describe these interactions in the model. An interdisciplinary and multifaceted approach is often necessary for more complex scenarios, considering various factors such as environmental constraints, as detailed in [110]. It is important to note that even with a comprehensive model, there are inherent assumptions and limitations. For instance, some models might assume material homogeneity or overlook nonlinear factors like friction and air resistance. Therefore, understanding the assumptions and limitations of these models is crucial when applying them in practical scenarios.

2.2. Data Modeling

Traditional rigid robots have been primarily utilized in factory settings, focusing on executing single, predefined tasks. Precise mathematical models are often one of the best options for these applications. However, as the tasks and environments for robotic applications become more complex, researchers have attempted to develop more intricate models. Yet, this approach significantly increases computational costs. In practical applications, compromises often need to be made, followed by optimization through control algorithms, which may not fully leverage the potential of modeling techniques. The challenge of modeling and controlling compliant continuum robots designed to operate in complex environments is substantial. Initially, the focus was primarily on developing models based on various assumptions.
With the ascent of deep learning [111,112,113] and artificial intelligence [114], data-driven models have garnered widespread attention across multiple domains, including robotics [115,116,117]. These models are increasingly being integrated into robotic modeling processes. Soft robots have notably adopted these advanced technologies, achieving significant breakthroughs [56,118,119]. This trend has also captivated researchers in continuum robots, a field grappling with nonlinear modeling challenges, spurring extensive research into data-driven modeling methodologies for continuum robots [48,120,121]. Data-driven modeling relies heavily on collecting and preprocessing high-quality data and selecting features and models carefully. In the context of continuum robotics, data acquisition predominantly depends on sensor data [122,123] (such as position, shape, flexibility, and bending), control signals, external databases or systems [124] (like SOFA [125], Sorosim [126], and SimSOFT [127]), nonlinear experimental data [128], simulation data [129,130,131], particular environmental factors, and expert input.
In data-driven modeling, particularly in the application to continuum robots, subsequent steps and corresponding challenges arise once data collection is completed. These steps include data preprocessing [132,133], feature engineering [134,135], model selection [136,137], model training [138], model validation [139] and, ultimately, model deployment [140]. For instance, challenges such as addressing missing and outlier values often arise during the data preprocessing stage, which is typically complex and prone to errors. Feature selection and engineering require an in-depth analysis of the raw data to identify the most relevant features. Meanwhile, during the model selection and training phases, we encounter the intricate task of choosing the most suitable model for the problem and fine-tuning its parameters.
Research and practice have adopted various effective strategies to address complex issues. During the data preprocessing stage, statistical methods and professional cleaning tools are employed [141]. Machine learning assesses feature importance and conducts correlation and causality analyses for feature selection. Model selection and training heavily rely on cross-validation and grid search techniques. Regularization or ensemble methods are utilized during the model validation phase to prevent overfitting. Finally, model deployment involves A/B testing to verify real-world utility and performance monitoring to ensure stability. Data-driven modeling, especially in applying continuum robots, confronts various challenges. These include, but are not limited to, data quality, high dimensionality and sparsity, imbalanced datasets, and the optimization of model hyperparameters. Furthermore, computational resource limitations and model interpretability must also be considered. Specific techniques and approaches must be employed to ensure the effectiveness and reliability of the models.
Various machine-learning models have been successfully employed in various application scenarios of continuum robots. These models include neural networks [142,143,144], reinforcement learning [145], support vector machines [146], and a myriad of combined strategies [147]. They have demonstrated exceptional performance in trajectory prediction, action recognition, and fault detection. Moreover, statistical models like Bayesian networks and Gaussian processes have also played a role in estimating the state and parameters of robots.
However, it is noteworthy that in the application of continuum robots, the interpretability of models [148,149,150] holds importance. This is especially evident in critical application scenarios such as medical surgery, where understanding the logic behind model predictions enhances user trust in the model and is also a critical factor in ensuring operational safety. Yet, deep learning models are often perceived as ’black boxes’ with complex internal logic to decipher. This challenge extends beyond technical aspects, encompassing ethical, social, and legal dimensions, suggesting that a comprehensive solution may involve a broader range of disciplines.
An interdisciplinary perspective, particularly from fields such as computer science, ethics in artificial intelligence, and psychology, offers new directions and methodologies for addressing the issue of model interpretability [151,152,153]. Integrating concepts like attention mechanisms [154] and local interpretable models can uncover the rationale behind model decisions [155]. This not only enhances the credibility of models in applications such as continuum robots, but also takes into account the ethical and social responsibilities of the models. In applying continuum robots, data-driven modeling is pivotal in solving technical challenges and opens new avenues for interdisciplinary research and collaboration. This contributes not only to the expansion of application horizons, but also provides new perspectives and tools at both theoretical and practical levels for addressing complex problems in the real world.

2.3. Hybrid Modeling

Principle modeling typically focuses on deriving fundamental equations of robot kinematics from basic physical principles. Still, such models often necessitate simplifications or assumptions in dealing with complex factors, such as friction and nonlinear responses. Conversely, data-driven modeling relies on extensive information collected from experimental data or real-world operations, fitting or interpreting these data through machine learning or statistical methods. Yet, it may lack a profound understanding of the underlying physical processes. Hybrid modeling [156,157] aims to synthesize the strengths of both approaches, thereby achieving a more comprehensive and accurate representation of intelligent system behavior.
Hybrid modeling represents a multi-scientific amalgamated modeling strategy [158], integrating diverse modeling methodologies and data sources [159,160]. This includes, but is not limited to, physically based models, data-driven models, statistical models, heuristic algorithms, and expert knowledge. The strategy aims to achieve comprehensive and precise description and control of complex, uncertain, and nonlinear systems by amalgamating various sources of information. The framework is applicable in the narrow sense of combining physical and data models and in a broader context of blending interdisciplinary modeling approaches [161]. Hybrid modeling in continuum robots primarily focuses on incorporating data-driven elements into physical models, particularly in the aspect of control algorithms [162]. Although the efficacy of this hybrid method has been notably enhanced with the continuous advancement of principle models and data science technologies [163], the significant compliant nonlinearity characteristics of continuum robots and the complexity of their operating environments necessitate and urge the expansion of the application scope and perspective of hybrid modeling.
Hybrid modeling has been extensively researched across various disciplines [157,164,165,166,167]. For the first time, we explore the hybrid modeling of continuum robots from both vertical and horizontal perspectives. A key element in the vertical approach is determining how to allocate weights to theoretical and data models appropriately, a process often dynamic and dependent on the environment. In scenarios with insufficient experimental data or low data quality, theoretical modeling is usually given greater weight, leveraging existing physical knowledge and mathematical theories for more reliable predictions. Conversely, when data are abundant and reliable, data models may receive higher weighting to capture complex environments’ impacts or nonlinear factors’ impacts more accurately. Additionally, in the framework of hybrid modeling, the horizontal integration strategy is also crucial, involving the combination of different types or sources of models on the same level [168,169,170,171]. For example, a continuum robot may possess multiple degrees of motion and sensory modules, each capable of being modeled theoretically and through data independently. Horizontal integration then addresses how to amalgamate these independent or partially overlapping models into a unified, more comprehensive model.
The hybrid modeling approach may increase the complexity and computational cost of the model while also complicating the model validation process. Ensuring that theoretical and data models are based on consistent assumptions and datasets to maintain data consistency presents a challenge [165,172]. Dynamically adjusting model weights can enhance adaptability, but may also impact model performance. Additionally, in an interdisciplinary environment, model interpretability should not be overlooked [173]. Resolving potential disciplinary contradictions or conflicts is a complex yet necessary task. Hybrid modeling provides a possible theoretical framework for continuum robots and extends to a more interdisciplinary domain. Within the broader context of interdisciplinary research, hybrid modeling could emerge as a diversified framework, accommodating knowledge and methodologies from various fields ranging from physics and material science to computer science, robotics, and statistics. This not only accelerates the flow of information and exchange of knowledge between disciplines, but also enriches the interdimensionality and accuracy of the models. More importantly, such interdisciplinary collaboration implies a multi-faceted examination of model assumptions and limitations, enhancing the model’s reliability and adaptability.

3. Magnetic Soft Robots

While continuum robots focus on millimeter-scale or more oversized dimensions, magnetic soft robots can extend to the nanoscale. However, ignoring the quantum effects of microscopic physical phenomena becomes challenging at the nanoscale. Therefore, the influences of different forms of magnetic fields and quantum effects are equally important to consider.

3.1. Uniform Magnetic Field

The uniform magnetic field is essential for its stable control environment in magnetic soft robots. This stability simplifies experimental design and ensures predictability and repeatability in wide-ranging applications, highlighting the need for advanced modeling to leverage its unique benefits effectively. For the magnetic soft robots described in Equation (5), the primary source of actuation has shifted from mechanical drive to the torque exerted by magnetic moments. This transition simplifies the model and opens new possibilities for precise control. Specifically, based on the existing continuum robot dynamics models, we can construct a more comprehensive and unified theoretical framework for magnetic soft robots in uniform magnetic fields by introducing magnetic moments as the main source of actuation [108,174,175]. For instance, the interaction between the magnetic moment m and a uniform magnetic field B can be described by the following mathematical expression involving magnetic field strength, current density, and other physical parameters:
τ mag = f ( m , B ) = m × B
The magnetic moment term in Equation (7) needs to be incorporated into Equation (5) to successfully construct the dynamic model of filamentous magnetic soft robots. This model increases the complexity and comprehensiveness of the original dynamics model, and opens new possibilities for precise control and optimization. Further information on the construction of filamentous magnetic soft robots can be found in the related literature [176,177,178,179].

3.2. Non-Uniform Magnetic Field

Despite the preference for uniform magnetic fields due to their simplicity in modeling and predictability in operational contexts, such as in the case of filamentous magnetic soft robots [25], non-uniform magnetic fields have demonstrated undeniable advantages in specific specialized medical applications. Specifically, non-uniform magnetic fields offer enhanced capabilities for localized and adaptive manipulation, making them particularly suitable for interventions in complex and deep-seated tissue structures, such as aortic treatment (Figure 1-3a) [180], cancer therapy [181,182,183], neuro intervention (Figure 1-3b) [184], intravascular surgery (Figure 1-3c) [185,186], and endoscopic procedures (Figure 1-3d) [187], etc. [188]. These unique advantages underscore the critical importance of non-uniform magnetic field modeling in medical scenarios requiring high precision and flexibility in deploying soft magnetic robots.
In a uniform magnetic field, since the net magnetic force is zero, our discussion primarily focuses on the influence of the magnetic torque. However, when transitioning to a non-uniform magnetic field, the situation becomes more complex. In such environments, microrobots are influenced not only by magnetic torque but also by magnetic forces. This can be expressed by the following equation, which demonstrates that:
F mag = ( m · B )
Although the hybrid Equation (8) increases the complexity of the model, it also expands our capability to control magnetic soft robots in various application scenarios precisely. Furthermore, fluid resistance becomes an indispensable dynamic factor in scenarios involving fluid mediums, such as operations within blood vessels or body cavities, especially in applications involving the manipulation of microrobots in fluid mediums. The following equation can represent this resistance:
F fluid = 6 π η r ( v u )
With a viscosity of η , u is the fluid velocity and v is the velocity of the robot in the fluid, and r is the approximate radius of the robot. Considering fluid resistance makes the multiphysics model more aligned with real-world applications and provides rich content for subsequent in-depth analysis and understanding. The net external force generated by the magnetic field and fluid resistance is reflected in the acceleration d 2 x d t 2 of the robot’s center of mass. The latter describes the robot’s angular acceleration d 2 θ d t 2 around its center of mass, which is determined by the total external torque τ applied. These two equations provide us with a complete and in-depth perspective for understanding and analyzing the dynamic behavior of robots in complex multiphysics fields. Therefore, the motion equation and rotational dynamics of the robot are, respectively, given by:
m d 2 x d t 2 = F mag + F fluid I d 2 θ d t 2 = τ
It should be noted that fluid resistance, the mass matrix, and the Coriolis terms remain constant in both models. However, we often face more complex magnetic field environments in practical applications. These environments may not only be non-uniform, but may also involve the combined effects of multiple magnetic fields. More importantly, in actual surgical applications, it is necessary to consider problems faced by interdisciplinary, such as biofilms [189] and infections related to catheters [190,191]. Although the literature [192] proposes a strategy for preventing biological infections, it still confronts multiple challenges [193]. Therefore, realizing the application of magnetic soft robots in the medical field requires interdisciplinary collaboration and integration.

3.3. Quantum Effects

At the micro and nano scales, modeling magnetic soft robots particularly requires further consideration of aspects such as quantum effects and molecular dynamics, as these factors may play a significant role at this scale [194]. For instance, quantum effects could influence the electromagnetic properties of materials [195,196]. Therefore, it is necessary to select a quantum mechanical model to describe these phenomena in addition to the dynamic description provided by Equation (10). This could include models like Density Functional Theory [197,198] (DFT) or Hartree–Fock [199,200], among others. This model is typically defined by a Hamiltonian H Q :
H Q = T + V Q ( r Q )
where T represents the kinetic energy term and V Q ( r Q ) is the quantum potential energy. The system’s ground state or several low-excited states are found by solving the Schrödinger equation or other quantum equations corresponding to the Hamiltonian H Q . Subsequently, the quantum correction force F Q is calculated, which is typically the gradient of the quantum potential energy V Q concerning the coordinates r Q :
F Q = V Q ( r Q )
This approach of introducing quantum effects through quantum correction forces offers the advantages of simplicity and broad applicability. Still, it also has the drawbacks of limited accuracy and the potential for increased computational burden. Finally, it is worth noting that in addition to quantum correction forces, path integral molecular dynamics (PIMD) can be used for a careful consideration of quantum effects [201,202]. PIMD represents a more exhaustive yet complex method, typically employed in systems where precise consideration of quantum effects is necessary.
The complex response characteristics of magnetic soft robots in nonlinear magnetic fields increase the difficulty of data modeling, rendering traditional linear models inadequate. Nonlinear models or deep learning algorithms are necessary to capture these relationships [203]. Modeling of magnetic soft robots must address time dependency, potentially utilizing networks with memory capabilities such as RNNs or LSTMs. Three-dimensional operations and complex magnetic fields pose challenges for data collection, necessitating specialized sensors or computer vision techniques. Data modeling [204,205,206] and hybrid modeling offers multiple options for magnetic soft robots, in contrast to the mature technologies of continuum robots. Researchers should draw on continuum robot strategies, emphasizing the integration of precise models, advanced algorithms, and sensing technologies while focusing on interdisciplinary biocompatibility studies in biological environments.
Data modeling for magnetic soft robots poses more significant challenges than traditional continuum robots, necessitating the management of more complex issues such as data sparsity imbalance and ensuring model interpretability and safety. Models must accurately capture nonlinear magnetic responses and maintain reliability in dynamic environments. This requires integrating data science and physics knowledge, advanced deep learning, and physical models to ensure accuracy in their three-dimensional operations and complex magnetic field responses. Therefore, interdisciplinary hybridization and combining theoretical and practical data are crucial in developing magnetic soft robots.

3.4. Numerical Framework

Following a detailed exploration of the interdisciplinary modeling framework for continuum robots and magnetic soft robots, numerical simulation emerges as a critical step in realizing these models. Discretization is often necessary to enhance the programmability of the robot models [207]. To meet the complex demands of interdisciplinary research, we have meticulously developed a novel classification strategy based on a theoretical perspective of basis functions. This categorization divides numerical methods into three major types (Figure 2): basis function methods, zero basis function methods, and hybrid zero basis methods. Within basis function methods, we further distinguish between global basis functions (such as spectral methods), local basis functions (like finite element methods), and hybrid methods (e.g., spectral-element methods). Zero basis function methods primarily encompass a range of specific algorithms, including Boltzmann lattice and Monte Carlo methods. Meanwhile, hybrid zero basis methods include innovative approaches to multiscale or interdisciplinary issues, particularly suited for complex problems such as fluid–structure interaction.
Although a plethora of literature has provided non-specialist readers with theoretical overviews of continuum mechanics [41,124,208,209,210] and magnetic soft robotics [211], offering novices in the field a broad perspective, interdisciplinary researchers still face challenges in selecting appropriate numerical methods and implementing them for numerical solutions. In this context, commercial simulation platforms such as Abaqus [212] and COMSOL Multiphysics [213], with their user-friendly interfaces and extensive case libraries, have emerged as powerful tools in interdisciplinary research, significantly lowering the barriers to entry. However, while these platforms have streamlined the numerical simulation process, a thorough understanding of the underlying mathematical principles remains crucial for expanding the frontiers of interdisciplinary integrated research. By deepening their knowledge of the mathematical framework, researchers can address complex problems more innovatively and foster the amalgamation of interdisciplinary expertise.

4. Interdisciplinary Analysis

4.1. Integration Analysis

Mathematical models are pivotal across multiple disciplines, including biomedical engineering, material science, chemistry, computer science, and pharmacology. In biomedical engineering, for instance, magnetic soft robotics models are instrumental in predicting interactions with complex biological tissues, offering precise simulations of cellular growth dynamics crucial for tissue engineering [214,215]. Within material science, these models aid in forecasting the performance of novel magnetic materials, particularly under extreme conditions [216]. In chemistry, models accurately delineate drug molecules’ propagation and reaction kinetics in complex systems, providing vital information for drug design [217,218]. In computer science, optimized algorithms utilize mathematical models to enhance the maritime capabilities of robots in unknown environments [219]. Lastly, in pharmacology, mathematical models are crucial for the design of personalized medication treatment plans, guiding dosage selection, and the development of treatment strategies [220].
Despite the extensive applicability of mathematical models across various disciplines, they exhibit notable limitations [221,222]. In biological applications, models often fail to capture the full complexity of biological systems, such as nonlinear interactions among multiple cells [223]. In material science, models may not adequately account for defects and impurities in materials during the manufacturing process [224]. Models of chemical reactions have limitations in predicting multiple reaction pathways, especially under variable experimental conditions [225,226]. In computer science, navigational algorithms may not be sufficiently adaptable to the variable and uncertain factors encountered in real-world environments [219]. In pharmacology, models also demonstrate limitations in considering individual genetic differences in drug responses [227]. Therefore, while these models provide valuable theoretical frameworks, they require continual refinement and validation by integrating experimental data and interdisciplinary knowledge.
In addressing the limitations of models, different disciplinary fields have developed their unique resolution strategies. Biologists utilize systems biology and high-resolution imaging techniques to incorporate detailed cellular and molecular level data into models, capturing the dynamics of complex biological systems [228,229]. Material scientists refine models by integrating multiscale simulations and high-throughput experimental data [230], detailing models to reflect micro defects and macroscopic properties during material fabrication [231]. Experts in the field of chemistry employ quantum chemical computations [232,233] and chemical kinetics simulations [234] for more precise predictions of reaction pathways and model calibration through experimental data. In electronics engineering and computer science, machine learning and data-driven approaches are used to enhance the adaptability of algorithms to cope with uncertainties in complex environments [71]. Meanwhile, pharmaceutical research is turning towards personalized medicine, integrating genomic information [235,236] and patient-specific biomarkers [237] to tailor models for accurate prediction of drug efficacy. The common goal of these strategies is to enhance the generalizability of models, ensuring that theoretical predictions better serve practical applications while promoting deeper interdisciplinary collaboration.
Faced with the limitations of models in specialized disciplines and the complexities of real-world application environments, in-depth research within a single discipline, despite its technical sophistication, often struggles to meet the challenges of practical applications fully [238,239,240,241]. The complexity of real-world applications demands models that are theoretically precise and possess interdisciplinary adaptability and applicability. In such contexts, interdisciplinary, integrated research becomes necessary for solving complex problems. More comprehensive models can be developed by integrating expertise in biology, material science, chemistry, computer science, and pharmacology. These models maintain their effectiveness and flexibility in the face of the variability and uncertainties of real-world applications. Interdisciplinary collaboration contributes to the empirical validation and improvement of models and the advancement of innovative technologies, ensuring the smooth translation of research findings into practical applications. Therefore, building an interdisciplinary collaborative platform to facilitate knowledge sharing and technology has become necessary in scientific research and technological innovation [242].
In interdisciplinary research, combining specialized technology with mathematical models is vital to enhancing precision and efficiency. In biology, high-throughput sequencing offers a wealth of genetic data, bolstering the accuracy of gene expression predictions [243]. Material science employs nanotechnology, such as atomic force microscopy, to refine models for accurately reflecting microscopic physical properties [244,245]. In chemistry, real-time monitoring techniques like mass spectrometry [246] provide direct data for kinetic models, optimizing reaction predictions. Deep learning algorithms in computer science process large datasets to reveal data patterns, guiding model adjustments [247]. Meanwhile, in pharmacology, combining clinical data with pharmacokinetic models supports the formulation of personalized treatment plans [248]. This melding of technology and models deepens disciplinary understanding and plays a significant role in technological advancement and application translation.

4.2. Case Analysis

To further study the interdisciplinary integration of continuum and magnetic soft robots, this article selects the research of Professor Zhao’s team as a case study. Moreover, numerous distinguished groups, such as those cited in [4,249,250,251,252,253,254,255,256], have demonstrated exceptional interdisciplinary integration capabilities in the research of continuum and magnetic soft robots, contributing to significant advancements within the field.
Initially confronting the emerging field of magnetic soft robots, Professor Zhao made pioneering contributions in the early stages, laying an essential foundation for the development of the field. In exploring novel soft materials, their work focused on hydrogels (Figure 3a) [257,258,259,260,261,262,263] and dielectric materials [264], addressing numerous challenges in theoretical modeling [265,266,267] and functionalization [268]. By combining these advanced materials with innovative manufacturing technologies (Figure 3b) [258,269,270], Professor Zhao and his team’s research outcomes have established a solid foundation for both the theoretical development of magnetic soft robotics and the manufacturing techniques of advanced materials. Their subsequent breakthroughs in magnetic soft robotics provide a robust accumulation of scientific and technological advancements.
Since 2018, the research team, building on their extensive experience in foundational theories [267,271], soft materials [272,273], and advanced manufacturing technologies [269], embarked on a systematic study of magnetic soft robotics. Utilizing the combination of 3D printing technology and magnetic media, they achieved innovations not only in the fabrication of magnetic soft robots (Figure 3c) [66], but also made significant contributions to the foundational theory and methodologies in magnetomechanics, providing new theoretical frameworks and computational methods for magnetoelastic mechanics (Figure 3d) [88,176,274,275]. Subsequently, the team effectively integrated material science, mechanical engineering, and computer science knowledge to develop magnetic soft robots with innovative features (Figure 3e) [25]. Following these initial achievements, Professor Zhao’s team also explored the application of magnetic soft robots in the biomedical field, particularly in neurovascular interventional treatments (Figure 3f) [69], demonstrating their broad applicability in interdisciplinary applications. This series of research efforts reflects the team’s in-depth exploration and practice in integrating interdisciplinary applications.
Figure 3. Research cases. In this interdisciplinary research case, the team initially focused on the enhancement of hydrogel properties. (a) Aiming to improve its physical characteristics, such as tensile strength. Subsequently, utilizing advanced manufacturing technologies, the team adeptly transformed the improved hydrogels into complex structures [257]. (b) This not only validated the practical utility of the material, but also propelled the development of manufacturing techniques. Further attempts were made to 3D print programmable ferromagnetic domains in soft materials [258]. (c) Yielding substantial academic achievements as illustrated. Following this, the team delved into the study of magnetorheological theory in flexible materials [66]. (d) Providing crucial scientific underpinnings for the design of magnetorheological soft robots. Building on these theoretical and material advancements, the team constructed and tested a prototype of the magnetorheological soft robot [176]. (e) Demonstrating an effective integration of theory and practice. Additionally, they extended the application of the magnetorheological soft robot to clinical experiments in the medical field [25]. (f) Exploring its potential in medical applications. In a lateral expansion of their research, the team also developed hydrogel fibers with high fatigue strength [69]. (g) A technology that holds broad prospects in optogenetics [276].
Figure 3. Research cases. In this interdisciplinary research case, the team initially focused on the enhancement of hydrogel properties. (a) Aiming to improve its physical characteristics, such as tensile strength. Subsequently, utilizing advanced manufacturing technologies, the team adeptly transformed the improved hydrogels into complex structures [257]. (b) This not only validated the practical utility of the material, but also propelled the development of manufacturing techniques. Further attempts were made to 3D print programmable ferromagnetic domains in soft materials [258]. (c) Yielding substantial academic achievements as illustrated. Following this, the team delved into the study of magnetorheological theory in flexible materials [66]. (d) Providing crucial scientific underpinnings for the design of magnetorheological soft robots. Building on these theoretical and material advancements, the team constructed and tested a prototype of the magnetorheological soft robot [176]. (e) Demonstrating an effective integration of theory and practice. Additionally, they extended the application of the magnetorheological soft robot to clinical experiments in the medical field [25]. (f) Exploring its potential in medical applications. In a lateral expansion of their research, the team also developed hydrogel fibers with high fatigue strength [69]. (g) A technology that holds broad prospects in optogenetics [276].
Micromachines 15 00313 g003
In his extensive research across multiple disciplines, Professor Zhao, taking the study of magnetic soft robots as an example, has integrated forefront technologies and knowledge from material science, mechanical engineering, physical chemistry, and biomedicine, showcasing the depth and breadth of his research. In terms of interdisciplinary integration, his team has advanced innovations in the use of 3D printing technology, not only in the development of hydrogel fibers (Figure 3g) [276] and conductive polymers [277], but also in pioneering explorations in the field of bioelectronics, such as the development of 3D printable high-performance conductive polymers for all-hydrogel bioelectronic interfaces [262,278]. Furthermore, Professor Zhao’s interdisciplinary research extends to the development of biological adhesives [279], significant for the sutureless repair of gastrointestinal defects [280]. His team has also achieved innovations in medical robotics, for instance, developing soft neural prosthetics [281] that offer electromyography control and tactile feedback, significantly enhancing the naturalness and user experience of prosthetic technology. In biomedical imaging, Professor Zhao’s team’s bioadhesive ultrasonic technology offers new solutions for long-term continuous imaging of various organs [282], holding significant potential for disease monitoring and surgical navigation.

5. Discussion

This article explores the challenges continuum, and magnetic soft robots face in medical applications, analyzing them from the perspective of model construction to interdisciplinary, integrated applications. We combine the knowledge of topology and group theory to build a unified model framework covering everything from continuum robots to magnetic soft robots. This framework promotes interdisciplinary learning and communication and provides a basis for in-depth discussion of different robot design and application disciplines’ issues, impacts, and limitations. Furthermore, through case analysis, this article reveals the importance of moving from basic theory (including model construction) to interdisciplinary comprehensive application in addressing the challenges of continuum and magnetic soft robots in the medical field.
Current developments in continuum and magnetic soft robotics exhibit two notable trends. On the one hand, many researchers are actively leveraging the latest outcomes of cutting-edge technologies [283], focusing on finding solutions within their specific disciplines [79,213,284,285]. However, this approach often overlooks critical interdisciplinary factors. For instance, in studies concerning the use of robots in blood environments, many have not adequately considered how environmental factors affect the functionality and safety of the robots. On the other hand, while some studies attempt to blend knowledge from multiple disciplines, including magnetomechanics, advanced manufacturing technologies [286,287,288], material science, and chemistry, there are still unresolved issues regarding essential materials. These include the biocompatibility of neodymium-iron-boron in applications [25] and clinical efficacy issues like biofilm infections in hydrogel thin films. Although these issues have garnered the attention of biomedical researchers [192], challenges remain regarding such technologies’ mechanisms and effective control.
Faced with these challenges, it is essential to recognize that while single-discipline research may be efficient in certain situations, interdisciplinary collaboration becomes particularly crucial in practical applications. Such cooperation facilitates the exchange and integration of knowledge across different fields and effectively addresses issues that might be overlooked from a single-disciplinary perspective. For instance, in the selection of materials, by combining expertise from material science, biomedicine, and mechanics, we can more comprehensively assess the suitability and safety of materials. Simultaneously, interdisciplinary teams can collaboratively explore new design solutions, such as developing novel composite materials, to meet the demands of robotic technology in complex environments.
However, despite the foundation of continuum and magnetic soft robotic design being rooted in advanced materials [278,289,290] and technologies [291,292], significant challenges arise in practical applications, particularly during sensitive operations such as intricate surgical procedures. These challenges are primarily manifested in the areas of structural design and control application. For instance, magnetic soft robots provide critical insights into the miniaturization of continuum robots, yet both remain in the nascent stages of academic research, facing heightened demands in real-world applications. The prolonged review process for medical devices intended for human intervention undeniably poses an obstacle, yet it does not constitute the crux of the issue.
The central issue lies in the fact that current research efforts are predominantly confined to individual disciplines or limited interdisciplinary studies. In modeling, researchers might focus on enhancing the accuracy of models, leading to complexities that render them unsuitable for real-time control. Therefore, it often becomes necessary to simplify these models and compensate for control precision through sensor feedback. Simultaneously, in sensor research, despite a focus on precision and stability, the biocompatibility of sensors in the complex, unstructured human body environment is often overlooked. Even studies that consider biocompatibility fail to fully address issues like biofilm infections during catheter-based interventions. Additionally, considerations around privacy, technological iteration, commercialization, and legal challenges must be taken into account [293,294]. Hence, to transition continuum and magnetic soft robots from academic research to technological application, deep, interdisciplinary collaboration becomes crucial. This inherently demands that each research phase provide effective ’interfaces’ (or meta-questions), facilitating in-depth synergy and knowledge exchange among various disciplines, thereby enabling a more comprehensive and efficient scientific inquiry.

6. Conclusions

This review provides a comprehensive review of the challenges of continuum and magnetic soft robotics in medical applications, particularly emphasizing the importance of interdisciplinary approaches in developing this field. Through a comprehensive analysis, we demonstrate the critical role of algebra and geometry in building a unified model framework. At the same time, data modeling and hybrid modeling are discussed, and their implications for precise control and practical applications are pointed out. Furthermore, this review reveals the potential for comprehensive interdisciplinary research to improve the utility and effectiveness of medical robots. Therefore, further strengthening interdisciplinary research and cooperation will be key to promoting technological innovation in this field and solving practical application challenges.

Author Contributions

H.W. and Y.M., investigation, formal analysis, design of methodology, writing—original draft; J.D., conceptualization, design of methodology, supervision, funding acquisition, writing—review and editing. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work was supported in part by China Scholarship Council (CSC), Project Grant Number: 202106960053.

Data Availability Statement

Data is contained within the article.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Hawkes, E.W.; Majidi, C.; Tolley, M.T. Hard questions for soft robotics. Sci. Robot. 2021, 6, eabg6049. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Laschi, C.; Mazzolai, B.; Cianchetti, M. Soft robotics: Technologies and systems pushing the boundaries of robot abilities. Sci. Robot. 2016, 1, eaah3690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Trivedi, D.; Rahn, C.D.; Kier, W.M.; Walker, I.D. Soft robotics: Biological inspiration, state of the art, and future research. Appl. Bionics Biomech. 2008, 5, 99–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Rus, D.; Tolley, M.T. Design, fabrication and control of soft robots. Nature 2015, 521, 467–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Rich, S.I.; Wood, R.J.; Majidi, C. Untethered soft robotics. Nat. Electron. 2018, 1, 102–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Wang, M.; Palmer, D.; Dong, X.; Alatorre, D.; Axinte, D.; Norton, A. Design and development of a slender dual-structure continuum robot for in-situ aeroengine repair. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), Madrid, Spain, 1–5 October 2018; pp. 5648–5653. [Google Scholar]
  7. Dong, Y.; Wang, L.; Xia, N.; Yang, Z.; Zhang, C.; Pan, C.; Jin, D.; Zhang, J.; Majidi, C.; Zhang, L. Untethered small-scale magnetic soft robot with programmable magnetization and integrated multifunctional modules. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8, eabn8932. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Aracri, S.; Giorgio-Serchi, F.; Suaria, G.; Sayed, M.E.; Nemitz, M.P.; Mahon, S.; Stokes, A.A. Soft robots for ocean exploration and offshore operations: A perspective. Soft Robot. 2021, 8, 625–639. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Gruber, D.F.; Wood, R.J. Advances and future outlooks in soft robotics for minimally invasive marine biology. Sci. Robot. 2022, 7, eabm6807. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Wang, T.; Joo, H.J.; Song, S.; Hu, W.; Keplinger, C.; Sitti, M. A versatile jellyfish-like robotic platform for effective underwater propulsion and manipulation. Sci. Adv. 2023, 9, eadg0292. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Shao, X.; Cai, Y.; Yin, S.; Li, T.; Jia, Z. Mechanics of interfacial delamination in deep-sea soft robots under hydrostatic pressure. J. Appl. Mech. 2023, 90, 021009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Zhang, Y.; Kong, D.; Shi, Y.; Cai, M.; Yu, Q.; Li, S.; Wang, K.; Liu, C. Recent progress on underwater soft robots: Adhesion, grabbing, actuating, and sensing. Front. Bioeng. Biotechnol. 2023, 11, 1196922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Billard, A.; Kragic, D. Trends and challenges in robot manipulation. Science 2019, 364, eaat8414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Xie, Z.; Domel, A.G.; An, N.; Green, C.; Gong, Z.; Wang, T.; Knubben, E.M.; Weaver, J.C.; Bertoldi, K.; Wen, L. Octopus arm-inspired tapered soft actuators with suckers for improved grasping. Soft Robot. 2020, 7, 639–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Zhang, Y.; Li, P.; Quan, J.; Li, L.; Zhang, G.; Zhou, D. Progress, challenges, and prospects of soft robotics for space applications. Adv. Intell. Syst. 2023, 5, 2200071. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dong, X.; Wang, M.; Mohammad, A.; Ba, W.; Russo, M.; Norton, A.; Kell, J.; Axinte, D. Continuum robots collaborate for safe manipulation of high-temperature flame to enable repairs in challenging environments. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 2022, 27, 4217–4220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Russo, M.; Sriratanasak, N.; Ba, W.; Dong, X.; Mohammad, A.; Axinte, D. Cooperative continuum robots: Enhancing individual continuum arms by reconfiguring into a parallel manipulator. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2021, 7, 1558–1565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Dong, X.; Palmer, D.; Axinte, D.; Kell, J. In-situ repair/maintenance with a continuum robotic machine tool in confined space. J. Manuf. Process. 2019, 38, 313–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Barrientos-Diez, J.; Dong, X.; Axinte, D.; Kell, J. Real-time kinematics of continuum robots: Modelling and validation. Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 2021, 67, 102019. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Robinson, G.; Davies, J.B.C. The Amadeus project: An overview. Ind. Robot. Int. J. 1997, 24, 290–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Davies, J.B.C.; Lane, D.; Robinson, G.; O’Brien, D.; Pickett, M.; Sfakiotakis, M.; Deacon, B. Subsea applications of continuum robots. In Proceedings of the 1998 International Symposium on Underwater Technology, Tokyo, Japan, 17 April 1998; pp. 363–369. [Google Scholar]
  22. Walker, I.D.; Green, K.E. Continuum Robots. In Encyclopedia of Complexity and Systems Science; Meyers, R.A., Ed.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 1475–1485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Webster, R.J., III; Jones, B.A. Design and kinematic modeling of constant curvature continuum robots: A review. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2010, 29, 1661–1683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Burgner-Kahrs, J.; Rucker, D.C.; Choset, H. Continuum robots for medical applications: A survey. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2015, 31, 1261–1280. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Kim, Y.; Parada, G.A.; Liu, S.; Zhao, X. Ferromagnetic soft continuum robots. Sci. Robot. 2019, 4, eaax7329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Camarillo, D.B.; Milne, C.F.; Carlson, C.R.; Zinn, M.R.; Salisbury, J.K. Mechanics modeling of tendon-driven continuum manipulators. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2008, 24, 1262–1273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Rucker, D.C.; Jones, B.A.; Webster, R.J., III. A geometrically exact model for externally loaded concentric-tube continuum robots. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2010, 26, 769–780. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Bajo, A.; Simaan, N. Hybrid motion/force control of multi-backbone continuum robots. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2016, 35, 422–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Chen, Y.; Wu, B.; Jin, J.; Xu, K. A variable curvature model for multi-backbone continuum robots to account for inter-segment coupling and external disturbance. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2021, 6, 1590–1597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Roy, R.; Wang, L.; Simaan, N. Modeling and estimation of friction, extension, and coupling effects in multisegment continuum robots. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 2016, 22, 909–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Till, J.; Aloi, V.; Riojas, K.E.; Anderson, P.L.; Webster, R.J., III; Rucker, C. A dynamic model for concentric tube robots. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2020, 36, 1704–1718. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Girerd, C.; Morimoto, T.K. Design and control of a hand-held concentric tube robot for minimally invasive surgery. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2020, 37, 1022–1038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Lin, J.T.; Girerd, C.; Yan, J.; Hwang, J.T.; Morimoto, T.K. A generalized framework for concentric tube robot design using gradient-based optimization. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2022, 38, 3774–3791. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Chitalia, Y.; Donder, A.; Dupont, P.E. Modeling Tendon-actuated Concentric Tube Robots. In Proceedings of the 2023 International Symposium on Medical Robotics (ISMR), Atlanta, GA, USA, 19–21 April 2023; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  35. Peyron, Q.; Boehler, Q.; Rougeot, P.; Roux, P.; Nelson, B.J.; Andreff, N.; Rabenorosoa, K.; Renaud, P. Magnetic concentric tube robots: Introduction and analysis. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2022, 41, 418–440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Oliver-Butler, K.; Childs, J.A.; Daniel, A.; Rucker, D.C. Concentric push–pull robots: Planar modeling and design. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2021, 38, 1186–1200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Childs, J.A.; Rucker, C. A Kinetostatic Model for Concentric Push-Pull Robots. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2023, 40, 554–572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Amanov, E.; Nguyen, T.D.; Burgner-Kahrs, J. Tendon-driven continuum robots with extensible sections—A model-based evaluation of path-following motions. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2021, 40, 7–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Thomas, T.L.; Kalpathy Venkiteswaran, V.; Ananthasuresh, G.; Misra, S. Surgical applications of compliant mechanisms: A review. J. Mech. Robot. 2021, 13, 020801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Stano, G.; Percoco, G. Additive manufacturing aimed to soft robots fabrication: A review. Extrem. Mech. Lett. 2021, 42, 101079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Armanini, C.; Boyer, F.; Mathew, A.T.; Duriez, C.; Renda, F. Soft robots modeling: A structured overview. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2023, 39, 1728–1748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Boyer, F.; Lebastard, V.; Candelier, F.; Renda, F. Dynamics of continuum and soft robots: A strain parameterization based approach. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2020, 37, 847–863. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Jiang, Q.; Li, J.; Masood, D. Fiber-optic-based force and shape sensing in surgical robots: A review. Sens. Rev. 2023, 43, 52–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Shi, C.; Luo, X.; Qi, P.; Li, T.; Song, S.; Najdovski, Z.; Fukuda, T.; Ren, H. Shape sensing techniques for continuum robots in minimally invasive surgery: A survey. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2016, 64, 1665–1678. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Alatorre, D.; Axinte, D.; Rabani, A. Continuum robot proprioception: The ionic liquid approach. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2021, 38, 526–535. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Tian, Y.; Zhu, X.; Meng, D.; Wang, X.; Liang, B. An overall configuration planning method of continuum hyper-redundant manipulators based on improved artificial potential field method. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2021, 6, 4867–4874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Luo, P.; Yao, S.; Yue, Y.; Wang, J.; Yan, H.; Meng, M.Q.H. Efficient RRT-based Safety-Constrained Motion Planning for Continuum Robots in Dynamic Environments. arXiv 2023, arXiv:2309.13813. [Google Scholar]
  48. George Thuruthel, T.; Ansari, Y.; Falotico, E.; Laschi, C. Control strategies for soft robotic manipulators: A survey. Soft Robot. 2018, 5, 149–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Della Santina, C.; Duriez, C.; Rus, D. Model-Based Control of Soft Robots: A Survey of the State of the Art and Open Challenges. IEEE Control. Syst. Mag. 2023, 43, 30–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Boyer, F.; Lebastard, V.; Candelier, F.; Renda, F.; Alamir, M. Statics and dynamics of continuum robots based on Cosserat rods and optimal control theories. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2022, 39, 1544–1562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Lilge, S.; Barfoot, T.D.; Burgner-Kahrs, J. Continuum robot state estimation using Gaussian process regression on SE (3). Int. J. Robot. Res. 2022, 41, 1099–1120. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Peyron, Q.; Burgner-Kahrs, J. Stability Analysis of Tendon Driven Continuum Robots and Application to Active Softening. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2023, 40, 85–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. da Veiga, T.; Chandler, J.H.; Lloyd, P.; Pittiglio, G.; Wilkinson, N.J.; Hoshiar, A.K.; Harris, R.A.; Valdastri, P. Challenges of continuum robots in clinical context: A review. Prog. Biomed. Eng. 2020, 2, 032003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Berthold, R.; Burgner-Kahrs, J.; Wangenheim, M.; Kahms, S. Investigating frictional contact behavior for soft material robot simulations. Meccanica 2023, 58, 2165–2176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Yasa, O.; Toshimitsu, Y.; Michelis, M.Y.; Jones, L.S.; Filippi, M.; Buchner, T.; Katzschmann, R.K. An Overview of Soft Robotics. Annu. Rev. Control. Robot. Auton. Syst. 2023, 6, 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Jumet, B.; Bell, M.D.; Sanchez, V.; Preston, D.J. A data-driven review of soft robotics. Adv. Intell. Syst. 2022, 4, 2100163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Kaspar, C.; Ravoo, B.; van der Wiel, W.G.; Wegner, S.; Pernice, W. The rise of intelligent matter. Nature 2021, 594, 345–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Apsite, I.; Salehi, S.; Ionov, L. Materials for smart soft actuator systems. Chem. Rev. 2021, 122, 1349–1415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  59. Zhu, Y.; Joralmon, D.; Shan, W.; Chen, Y.; Rong, J.; Zhao, H.; Xiao, S.; Li, X. 3D printing biomimetic materials and structures for biomedical applications. Bio-Des. Manuf. 2021, 4, 405–428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Wu, S.; Hu, W.; Ze, Q.; Sitti, M.; Zhao, R. Multifunctional magnetic soft composites: A review. Multifunct. Mater. 2020, 3, 042003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  61. Terryn, S.; Langenbach, J.; Roels, E.; Brancart, J.; Bakkali-Hassani, C.; Poutrel, Q.A.; Georgopoulou, A.; Thuruthel, T.G.; Safaei, A.; Ferrentino, P.; et al. A review on self-healing polymers for soft robotics. Mater. Today 2021, 47, 187–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ilami, M.; Bagheri, H.; Ahmed, R.; Skowronek, E.O.; Marvi, H. Materials, actuators, and sensors for soft bioinspired robots. Adv. Mater. 2021, 33, 2003139. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Schmidt, C.K.; Medina-Sánchez, M.; Edmondson, R.J.; Schmidt, O.G. Engineering microrobots for targeted cancer therapies from a medical perspective. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 5618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Eerenstein, W.; Mathur, N.; Scott, J.F. Multiferroic and magnetoelectric materials. Nature 2006, 442, 759–765. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Xu, T.; Zhang, J.; Salehizadeh, M.; Onaizah, O.; Diller, E. Millimeter-scale flexible robots with programmable three-dimensional magnetization and motions. Sci. Robot. 2019, 4, eaav4494. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Kim, Y.; Yuk, H.; Zhao, R.; Chester, S.A.; Zhao, X. Printing ferromagnetic domains for untethered fast-transforming soft materials. Nature 2018, 558, 274–279. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Ebrahimi, N.; Bi, C.; Cappelleri, D.J.; Ciuti, G.; Conn, A.T.; Faivre, D.; Habibi, N.; Hošovskỳ, A.; Iacovacci, V.; Khalil, I.S.; et al. Magnetic actuation methods in bio/soft robotics. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2021, 31, 2005137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Hou, Y.; Wang, H.; Fu, R.; Wang, X.; Yu, J.; Zhang, S.; Huang, Q.; Sun, Y.; Fukuda, T. A review on microrobots driven by optical and magnetic fields. Lab Chip 2023, 23, 848–868. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Kim, Y.; Genevriere, E.; Harker, P.; Choe, J.; Balicki, M.; Regenhardt, R.W.; Vranic, J.E.; Dmytriw, A.A.; Patel, A.B.; Zhao, X. Telerobotic neurovascular interventions with magnetic manipulation. Sci. Robot. 2022, 7, eabg9907. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Kladko, D.V.; Vinogradov, V.V. Magnetosurgery: Principles, design, and applications. Smart Mater. Med. 2024, 5, 24–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Yang, Z.; Yang, H.; Cao, Y.; Cui, Y.; Zhang, L. Magnetically Actuated Continuum Medical Robots: A Review. Adv. Intell. Syst. 2023, 5, 2200416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Shen, Y.; Jin, D.; Fu, M.; Liu, S.; Xu, Z.; Cao, Q.; Wang, B.; Li, G.; Chen, W.; Liu, S.; et al. Reactive wetting enabled anchoring of non-wettable iron oxide in liquid metal for miniature soft robot. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 6276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Zhou, H.; Mayorga-Martinez, C.C.; Pané, S.; Zhang, L.; Pumera, M. Magnetically driven micro and nanorobots. Chem. Rev. 2021, 121, 4999–5041. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Wu, Z.; Chen, Y.; Mukasa, D.; Pak, O.S.; Gao, W. Medical micro/nanorobots in complex media. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2020, 49, 8088–8112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Liu, J.; Yu, S.; Xu, B.; Tian, Z.; Zhang, H.; Liu, K.; Shi, X.; Zhao, Z.; Liu, C.; Lin, X.; et al. Magnetically propelled soft microrobot navigating through constricted microchannels. Appl. Mater. Today 2021, 25, 101237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Eshaghi, M.; Ghasemi, M.; Khorshidi, K. Design, manufacturing and applications of small-scale magnetic soft robots. Extrem. Mech. Lett. 2021, 44, 101268. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Alapan, Y.; Karacakol, A.C.; Guzelhan, S.N.; Isik, I.; Sitti, M. Reprogrammable shape morphing of magnetic soft machines. Sci. Adv. 2020, 6, eabc6414. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Lum, G.Z.; Ye, Z.; Dong, X.; Marvi, H.; Erin, O.; Hu, W.; Sitti, M. Shape-programmable magnetic soft matter. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, e6007–e6015. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Zhang, J.; Ren, Z.; Hu, W.; Soon, R.H.; Yasa, I.C.; Liu, Z.; Sitti, M. Voxelated three-dimensional miniature magnetic soft machines via multimaterial heterogeneous assembly. Sci. Robot. 2021, 6, eabf0112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Hu, W.; Lum, G.Z.; Mastrangeli, M.; Sitti, M. Small-scale soft-bodied robot with multimodal locomotion. Nature 2018, 554, 81–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  81. Zhao, R.; Dai, H.; Yao, H.; Shi, Y.; Zhou, G. Shape programmable magnetic pixel soft robot. Heliyon 2022, 8, e11415. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Liu, Y.; Lin, G.; Medina-Sánchez, M.; Guix, M.; Makarov, D.; Jin, D. Responsive Magnetic Nanocomposites for Intelligent Shape-Morphing Microrobots. ACS Nano 2023, 17, 8899–8917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  83. Shen, H.; Cai, S.; Wang, Z.; Ge, Z.; Yang, W. Magnetically Driven Microrobots: Recent Progress and Future Development. Mater. Des. 2023, 227, 111735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Duan, W.; Akinyemi, T.; Du, W.; Ma, J.; Chen, X.; Wang, F.; Omisore, O.; Luo, J.; Wang, H.; Wang, L. Technical and Clinical Progress on Robot-Assisted Endovascular Interventions: A Review. Micromachines 2023, 14, 197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Liu, Q.; Ye, X.; Wu, H.; Zhang, X. A multiphysics model of magnetic hydrogel under a moving magnet for targeted drug delivery. Int. J. Mech. Sci. 2022, 215, 106963. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Rao, P.; Peyron, Q.; Lilge, S.; Burgner-Kahrs, J. How to model tendon-driven continuum robots and benchmark modelling performance. Front. Robot. AI 2021, 7, 630245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  87. Xu, K.; Goldman, R.E.; Ding, J.; Allen, P.K.; Fowler, D.L.; Simaan, N. System design of an insertable robotic effector platform for single port access (SPA) surgery. In Proceedings of the 2009 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, St. Louis, MO, USA, 10–15 October 2009; pp. 5546–5552. [Google Scholar]
  88. Zhao, R.; Kim, Y.; Chester, S.A.; Sharma, P.; Zhao, X. Mechanics of hard-magnetic soft materials. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 2019, 124, 244–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Rubin, M.; Rubin, M. Cosserat Theories: Shells, Rods and Points; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2000; pp. 1–480. [Google Scholar]
  90. Renda, F.; Boyer, F.; Dias, J.; Seneviratne, L. Discrete cosserat approach for multisection soft manipulator dynamics. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2018, 34, 1518–1533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Zhang, X.; Naughton, N.; Parthasarathy, T.; Gazzola, M. Friction modulation in limbless, three-dimensional gaits and heterogeneous terrains. Nat. Commun. 2021, 12, 6076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Zhang, X.; Chan, F.K.; Parthasarathy, T.; Gazzola, M. Modeling and simulation of complex dynamic musculoskeletal architectures. Nat. Commun. 2019, 10, 4825. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  93. Hasanzadeh, S.; Janabi-Sharifi, F. An efficient static analysis of continuum robots. J. Mech. Robot. 2014, 6, 031011. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Li, X.; Yu, W.; Baghaee, M.; Cao, C.; Chen, D.; Liu, J.; Yuan, H. Geometrically exact finite element formulation for tendon-driven continuum robots. Acta Mech. Solida Sin. 2022, 35, 552–570. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Godage, I.S.; Branson, D.T.; Guglielmino, E.; Medrano-Cerda, G.A.; Caldwell, D.G. Dynamics for biomimetic continuum arms: A modal approach. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, Karon Beach, Thailand, 7–11 December 2011; pp. 104–109. [Google Scholar]
  96. Yang, J.; Peng, H.; Zhou, W.; Zhang, J.; Wu, Z. A modular approach for dynamic modeling of multisegment continuum robots. Mech. Mach. Theory 2021, 165, 104429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Dickson, L.E. Modern Algebraic Theories; BH Sanborn & Company: Denver, CO, USA, 1926. [Google Scholar]
  98. Robinson, D.J. A Course in the Theory of Groups; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; Volume 80. [Google Scholar]
  99. Armstrong, M.A. Groups and Symmetry; Springer Science & Business Media: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1997. [Google Scholar]
  100. Dai, J. Geometrical Foundations and Screw Algebra for Mechanisms and Robotics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  101. Siciliano, B.; Khatib, O.; Kröger, T. Springer Handbook of Robotics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2008; Volume 200. [Google Scholar]
  102. Murray, R.M.; Li, Z.; Sastry, S.S. A Mathematical Introduction to Robotic Manipulation; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 1994. [Google Scholar]
  103. Lynch, K.M.; Park, F.C. Modern Robotics; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar]
  104. Poincaré, H. Sur une forme nouvelle des équations de la mécanique. CR Acad. Sci. 1901, 132, 369–371. [Google Scholar]
  105. Dym, C.L.; Shames, I.H. Solid Mechanics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1973. [Google Scholar]
  106. Till, J.; Aloi, V.; Rucker, C. Real-time dynamics of soft and continuum robots based on Cosserat rod models. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2019, 38, 723–746. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Wu, G.; Shi, G. Design, modeling, and workspace analysis of an extensible rod-driven parallel continuum robot. Mech. Mach. Theory 2022, 172, 104798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Edelmann, J.; Petruska, A.J.; Nelson, B.J. Magnetic control of continuum devices. Int. J. Robot. Res. 2017, 36, 68–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Hesch, C.; Glas, S.; Schuß, S. Space-time multibody dynamics. Multibody Syst. Dyn. 2023, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Chen, P.; Liu, Y.; Yuan, T.; Shi, W. Modeling of continuum robots with environmental constraints. In Engineering with Computers; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2023; pp. 1–14. [Google Scholar]
  111. McCulloch, W.S.; Pitts, W. A logical calculus of the ideas immanent in nervous activity. Bull. Math. Biophys. 1943, 5, 115–133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Kelley, H.J. Gradient theory of optimal flight paths. Ars J. 1960, 30, 947–954. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Krizhevsky, A.; Sutskever, I.; Hinton, G.E. Imagenet classification with deep convolutional neural networks. Adv. Neural Inf. Process. Syst. 2012, 25, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Littman, M.L.; Ajunwa, I.; Berger, G.; Boutilier, C.; Currie, M.; Doshi-Velez, F.; Hadfield, G.; Horowitz, M.C.; Isbell, C.; Kitano, H.; et al. Gathering strength, gathering storms: The one hundred year study on artificial intelligence (AI100) 2021 study panel report. arXiv 2022, arXiv:2210.15767. [Google Scholar]
  115. Soori, M.; Arezoo, B.; Dastres, R. Artificial intelligence, machine learning and deep learning in advanced robotics, A review. Cogn. Robot. 2023, 3, 54–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Morales, E.F.; Murrieta-Cid, R.; Becerra, I.; Esquivel-Basaldua, M.A. A survey on deep learning and deep reinforcement learning in robotics with a tutorial on deep reinforcement learning. Intell. Serv. Robot. 2021, 14, 773–805. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Jumper, J.; Evans, R.; Pritzel, A.; Green, T.; Figurnov, M.; Ronneberger, O.; Tunyasuvunakool, K.; Bates, R.; Žídek, A.; Potapenko, A.; et al. Highly accurate protein structure prediction with AlphaFold. Nature 2021, 596, 583–589. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Bhagat, S.; Banerjee, H.; Ho Tse, Z.T.; Ren, H. Deep reinforcement learning for soft, flexible robots: Brief review with impending challenges. Robotics 2019, 8, 4. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Kim, D.; Kim, S.H.; Kim, T.; Kang, B.B.; Lee, M.; Park, W.; Ku, S.; Kim, D.; Kwon, J.; Lee, H.; et al. Review of machine learning methods in soft robotics. PLoS ONE 2021, 16, e0246102. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  120. Sahoo, A.R.; Chakraborty, P. A Study on Position Control of a Continuum Arm Using MAML (Model-Agnostic Meta-Learning) for Adapting Different Loading Conditions. IEEE Access 2022, 10, 14980–14992. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. Wei, D.; Zhou, J.; Zhu, Y.; Ma, J.; Ma, S. Axis-space framework for cable-driven soft continuum robot control via reinforcement learning. Commun. Eng. 2023, 2, 61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  122. Reiter, A.; Goldman, R.E.; Bajo, A.; Iliopoulos, K.; Simaan, N.; Allen, P.K. A learning algorithm for visual pose estimation of continuum robots. In Proceedings of the 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, San Francisco, CA, USA, 25–30 September 2011; pp. 2390–2396. [Google Scholar]
  123. Thuruthel, T.G.; Shih, B.; Laschi, C.; Tolley, M.T. Soft robot perception using embedded soft sensors and recurrent neural networks. Sci. Robot. 2019, 4, eaav1488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Schegg, P.; Duriez, C. Review on generic methods for mechanical modeling, simulation and control of soft robots. PLoS ONE 2022, 17, e0251059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Largilliere, F.; Verona, V.; Coevoet, E.; Sanz-Lopez, M.; Dequidt, J.; Duriez, C. Real-time control of soft-robots using asynchronous finite element modeling. In Proceedings of the 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Seattle, WA, USA, 26–30 May 2015; pp. 2550–2555. [Google Scholar]
  126. Mathew, A.T.; Hmida, I.M.B.; Armanini, C.; Boyer, F.; Renda, F. Sorosim: A matlab toolbox for hybrid rigid-soft robots based on the geometric variable-strain approach. IEEE Robot. Autom. Mag. 2022, 30, 106–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Grazioso, S.; Di Gironimo, G.; Siciliano, B. A geometrically exact model for soft continuum robots: The finite element deformation space formulation. Soft Robot. 2019, 6, 790–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Wu, Q.; Gu, Y.; Li, Y.; Zhang, B.; Chepinskiy, S.A.; Wang, J.; Zhilenkov, A.A.; Krasnov, A.Y.; Chernyi, S. Position control of cable-driven robotic soft arm based on deep reinforcement learning. Information 2020, 11, 310. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  129. Giorelli, M.; Renda, F.; Calisti, M.; Arienti, A.; Ferri, G.; Laschi, C. Neural network and jacobian method for solving the inverse statics of a cable-driven soft arm with nonconstant curvature. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2015, 31, 823–834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  130. Thuruthel, T.G.; Falotico, E.; Renda, F.; Laschi, C. Learning dynamic models for open loop predictive control of soft robotic manipulators. Bioinspiration Biomimetics 2017, 12, 066003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  131. Lee, K.H.; Fu, D.K.; Leong, M.C.; Chow, M.; Fu, H.C.; Althoefer, K.; Sze, K.Y.; Yeung, C.K.; Kwok, K.W. Nonparametric online learning control for soft continuum robot: An enabling technique for effective endoscopic navigation. Soft Robot. 2017, 4, 324–337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  132. Zheng, A.; Casari, A. Feature Engineering for Machine Learning: Principles and Techniques for Data Scientists; O’Reilly Media, Inc.: Sebastopol, CA, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  133. Felix, E.A.; Lee, S.P. Systematic literature review of preprocessing techniques for imbalanced data. IET Softw. 2019, 13, 479–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  134. Kuhn, M.; Johnson, K. Feature Engineering and Selection: A Practical Approach for Predictive Models; Chapman and Hall/CRC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  135. Khurana, U.; Samulowitz, H.; Turaga, D. Feature engineering for predictive modeling using reinforcement learning. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, New Orleans, LA, USA, 2–7 February 2018; Volume 32. [Google Scholar]
  136. Anderson, D.; Burnham, K. Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2004; Volume 63, pp. 1–488. [Google Scholar]
  137. Clarke, B. Comparing Bayes model averaging and stacking when model approximation error cannot be ignored. J. Mach. Learn. Res. 2003, 4, 683–712. [Google Scholar]
  138. Goodfellow, I.; Bengio, Y.; Courville, A. Deep Learning; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 2016. [Google Scholar]
  139. Hastie, T.; Tibshirani, R.; Friedman, J.H.; Friedman, J.H. The Elements of Statistical Learning: Data Mining, Inference, and Prediction; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2009; Volume 2. [Google Scholar]
  140. Singh, P. Deploy Machine Learning Models to Production; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2021. [Google Scholar]
  141. Van der Loo, M.; De Jonge, E. Statistical Data Cleaning with Applications in R; John Wiley & Sons: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  142. Tan, N.; Yu, P.; Zhang, X.; Wang, T. Model-free motion control of continuum robots based on a zeroing neurodynamic approach. Neural Netw. 2021, 133, 21–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Tariverdi, A.; Venkiteswaran, V.K.; Richter, M.; Elle, O.J.; Tørresen, J.; Mathiassen, K.; Misra, S.; Martinsen, Ø.G. A recurrent neural-network-based real-time dynamic model for soft continuum manipulators. Front. Robot. AI 2021, 8, 631303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Tan, N.; Yu, P.; Zhong, Z.; Zhang, Y. Data-Driven Control for Continuum Robots Based on Discrete Zeroing Neural Networks. IEEE Trans. Ind. Inform. 2022, 19, 7088–7098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  145. Youssef, S.M.; Soliman, M.; Saleh, M.A.; Elsayed, A.H.; Radwan, A.G. Design and control of soft biomimetic pangasius fish robot using fin ray effect and reinforcement learning. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 21861. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Goldman, R.E.; Bajo, A.; Simaan, N. Compliant motion control for multisegment continuum robots with actuation force sensing. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2014, 30, 890–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  147. Ji, G.; Yan, J.; Du, J.; Yan, W.; Chen, J.; Lu, Y.; Rojas, J.; Cheng, S.S. Towards safe control of continuum manipulator using shielded multiagent reinforcement learning. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2021, 6, 7461–7468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Molnar, C. Interpretable Machine Learning; Lulu.com: Morrisville, NC, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  149. Tsang, W.K.; Benoit, D.F. Interpretability and Explainability in Machine Learning. In Living Beyond Data: Toward Sustainable Value Creation; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2022; pp. 89–100. [Google Scholar]
  150. Hall, P.; Gill, N. An Introduction to Machine Learning Interpretability; O’Reilly Media, Incorporated: Sebastopol, CA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  151. Amann, J.; Blasimme, A.; Vayena, E.; Frey, D.; Madai, V.I.; Consortium, P. Explainability for artificial intelligence in healthcare: A multidisciplinary perspective. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2020, 20, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  152. Dwivedi, Y.K.; Hughes, L.; Ismagilova, E.; Aarts, G.; Coombs, C.; Crick, T.; Duan, Y.; Dwivedi, R.; Edwards, J.; Eirug, A.; et al. Artificial Intelligence (AI): Multidisciplinary perspectives on emerging challenges, opportunities, and agenda for research, practice and policy. Int. J. Inf. Manag. 2021, 57, 101994. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  153. Xu, Q.; Xie, W.; Liao, B.; Hu, C.; Qin, L.; Yang, Z.; Xiong, H.; Lyu, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Luo, A.; et al. Interpretability of Clinical Decision Support Systems Based on Artificial Intelligence from Technological and Medical Perspective: A Systematic Review. J. Healthc. Eng. 2023, 2023, 9919269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  154. Chen, P.; Dong, W.; Wang, J.; Lu, X.; Kaymak, U.; Huang, Z. Interpretable clinical prediction via attention-based neural network. BMC Med. Inform. Decis. Mak. 2020, 20, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  155. Van der Velden, B.H.; Kuijf, H.J.; Gilhuijs, K.G.; Viergever, M.A. Explainable artificial intelligence (XAI) in deep learning-based medical image analysis. Med. Image Anal. 2022, 79, 102470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  156. Zhang, J.; Petersen, S.D.; Radivojevic, T.; Ramirez, A.; Pérez-Manríquez, A.; Abeliuk, E.; Sánchez, B.J.; Costello, Z.; Chen, Y.; Fero, M.J.; et al. Combining mechanistic and machine learning models for predictive engineering and optimization of tryptophan metabolism. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 4880. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  157. Gettelman, A.; Geer, A.J.; Forbes, R.M.; Carmichael, G.R.; Feingold, G.; Posselt, D.J.; Stephens, G.L.; van den Heever, S.C.; Varble, A.C.; Zuidema, P. The future of Earth system prediction: Advances in model-data fusion. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8, eabn3488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  158. Yang, S.; Navarathna, P.; Ghosh, S.; Bequette, B.W. Hybrid modeling in the era of smart manufacturing. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2020, 140, 106874. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  159. Zhou, T.; Gani, R.; Sundmacher, K. Hybrid data-driven and mechanistic modeling approaches for multiscale material and process design. Engineering 2021, 7, 1231–1238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  160. Zhang, H.; Qi, Q.; Ji, W.; Tao, F. An update method for digital twin multi-dimension models. Robot. Comput. Integr. Manuf. 2023, 80, 102481. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  161. Xiang, L.; Xunbo, L.; Liang, C. Multi-disciplinary modeling and collaborative simulation of multi-robot systems based on HLA. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics (ROBIO), Sanya, China, 15–18 December 2007; pp. 553–558. [Google Scholar]
  162. Braganza, D.; Dawson, D.M.; Walker, I.D.; Nath, N. A neural network controller for continuum robots. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2007, 23, 1270–1277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  163. Thuruthel, T.G.; Falotico, E.; Renda, F.; Laschi, C. Model-based reinforcement learning for closed-loop dynamic control of soft robotic manipulators. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2018, 35, 124–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  164. Lu, Y.; Yang, B.; Mo, Y. Two-timescale mechanism-and-data-driven control for aggressive driving of autonomous cars. In Proceedings of the 2021 China Automation Congress (CAC), Beijing, China, 22–24 October 2021; pp. 7874–7879. [Google Scholar]
  165. Tsopanoglou, A.; del Val, I.J. Moving towards an era of hybrid modelling: Advantages and challenges of coupling mechanistic and data-driven models for upstream pharmaceutical bioprocesses. Curr. Opin. Chem. Eng. 2021, 32, 100691. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  166. Arcomano, T.; Szunyogh, I.; Wikner, A.; Pathak, J.; Hunt, B.R.; Ott, E. A hybrid approach to atmospheric modeling that combines machine learning with a physics-based numerical model. J. Adv. Model. Earth Syst. 2022, 14, e2021MS002712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  167. Lee, D.; Jayaraman, A.; Kwon, J.S.I. A Hybrid Mechanistic Data-Driven Approach for Modeling Uncertain Intracellular Signaling Pathways. In Proceedings of the 2021 American Control Conference (ACC), New Orleans, LA, USA, 25–28 May 2021; pp. 1903–1908. [Google Scholar]
  168. Hammes-Schiffer, S.; Galli, G. Integration of theory and experiment in the modelling of heterogeneous electrocatalysis. Nat. Energy 2021, 6, 700–705. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  169. Ellis, J.; Jacobs, M.; Dijkstra, J.; van Laar, H.; Cant, J.; Tulpan, D.; Ferguson, N. Synergy between mechanistic modelling and data-driven models for modern animal production systems in the era of big data. Animal 2020, 14, s223–s237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  170. Sansana, J.; Joswiak, M.N.; Castillo, I.; Wang, Z.; Rendall, R.; Chiang, L.H.; Reis, M.S. Recent trends on hybrid modeling for Industry 4.0. Comput. Chem. Eng. 2021, 151, 107365. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  171. Kurz, S.; De Gersem, H.; Galetzka, A.; Klaedtke, A.; Liebsch, M.; Loukrezis, D.; Russenschuck, S.; Schmidt, M. Hybrid modeling: Towards the next level of scientific computing in engineering. J. Math. Ind. 2022, 12, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  172. Mahanty, B. Hybrid modeling in bioprocess dynamics: Structural variabilities, implementation strategies, and practical challenges. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2023, 120, 2072–2091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  173. Wang, J.; Li, Y.; Gao, R.X.; Zhang, F. Hybrid physics-based and data-driven models for smart manufacturing: Modelling, simulation, and explainability. J. Manuf. Syst. 2022, 63, 381–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  174. Kratchman, L.B.; Bruns, T.L.; Abbott, J.J.; Webster, R.J. Guiding elastic rods with a robot-manipulated magnet for medical applications. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2016, 33, 227–233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  175. Fu, S.; Chen, B.; Li, D.; Han, J.; Xu, S.; Wang, S.; Huang, C.; Qiu, M.; Cheng, S.; Wu, X.; et al. A Magnetically Controlled Guidewire Robot System with Steering and Propulsion Capabilities for Vascular Interventional Surgery. Adv. Intell. Syst. 2023, 5, 2300267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  176. Wang, L.; Kim, Y.; Guo, C.F.; Zhao, X. Hard-magnetic elastica. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 2020, 142, 104045. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  177. Sano, T.G.; Pezzulla, M.; Reis, P.M. A Kirchhoff-like theory for hard magnetic rods under geometrically nonlinear deformation in three dimensions. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 2022, 160, 104739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  178. Huang, W.; Liu, M.; Hsia, K.J. A discrete model for the geometrically nonlinear mechanics of hard-magnetic slender structures. Extrem. Mech. Lett. 2023, 59, 101977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  179. Li, X.; Yu, W.; Liu, J.; Zhu, X.; Wang, H.; Sun, X.; Liu, J.; Yuan, H. A mechanics model of hard-magnetic soft rod with deformable cross-section under three-dimensional large deformation. Int. J. Solids Struct. 2023, 279, 112344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  180. Richter, M.; Kaya, M.; Sikorski, J.; Abelmann, L.; Venkiteswaran, V.K.; Misra, S. Magnetic Soft Helical Manipulators with Local Dipole Interactions for Flexibility and Forces. Soft Robot. 2023, 10, 647–659. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  181. Gavilán, H.; Avugadda, S.K.; Fernández-Cabada, T.; Soni, N.; Cassani, M.; Mai, B.T.; Chantrell, R.; Pellegrino, T. Magnetic nanoparticles and clusters for magnetic hyperthermia: Optimizing their heat performance and developing combinatorial therapies to tackle cancer. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2021, 50, 11614–11667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  182. Gavilán, H.; Rizzo, G.M.; Silvestri, N.; Mai, B.T.; Pellegrino, T. Scale-up approach for the preparation of magnetic ferrite nanocubes and other shapes with benchmark performance for magnetic hyperthermia applications. Nat. Protoc. 2023, 18, 783–809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  183. Lee, J.H.; Jang, J.t.; Choi, J.s.; Moon, S.H.; Noh, S.h.; Kim, J.w.; Kim, J.G.; Kim, I.S.; Park, K.I.; Cheon, J. Exchange-coupled magnetic nanoparticles for efficient heat induction. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2011, 6, 418–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  184. Kim, Y.; Genevriere, E.; Harker, P.; Choe, J.; Balicki, M.; Patel, A.B.; Zhao, X. Telerobotically Controlled Magnetic Soft Continuum Robots for Neurovascular Interventions. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), Philadelphia, PA, USA, 23–27 May 2022; pp. 9600–9606. [Google Scholar]
  185. Liu, Y.; Mohanraj, T.G.; Rajebi, M.R.; Zhou, L.; Alambeigi, F. Multiphysical analytical modeling and design of a magnetically steerable robotic catheter for treatment of peripheral artery disease. IEEE/ASME Trans. Mechatronics 2022, 27, 1873–1881. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  186. Lu, K.; Zhou, C.; Li, Z.; Liu, Y.; Wang, F.; Xuan, L.; Wang, X. Multi-level magnetic microrobot delivery strategy within a hierarchical vascularized organ-on-a-chip. Lab Chip 2024, 24, 446–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  187. Pittiglio, G.; Lloyd, P.; da Veiga, T.; Onaizah, O.; Pompili, C.; Chandler, J.H.; Valdastri, P. Patient-specific magnetic catheters for atraumatic autonomous endoscopy. Soft Robot. 2022, 9, 1120–1133. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  188. Thomas, T.L.; Sikorski, J.; Ananthasuresh, G.; Venkiteswaran, V.K.; Misra, S. Design, sensing, and control of a magnetic compliant continuum manipulator. IEEE Trans. Med. Robot. Bionics 2022, 4, 910–921. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  189. Flemming, H.C.; Wingender, J. The biofilm matrix. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2010, 8, 623–633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  190. Faustino, C.M.; Lemos, S.M.; Monge, N.; Ribeiro, I.A. A scope at antifouling strategies to prevent catheter-associated infections. Adv. Colloid Interface Sci. 2020, 284, 102230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  191. Rajaramon, S.; Shanmugam, K.; Dandela, R.; Solomon, A.P. Emerging evidence-based innovative approaches to control catheter-associated urinary tract infection: A review. Front. Cell. Infect. Microbiol. 2023, 13, 1134433. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  192. Baburova, P.I.; Kladko, D.V.; Lokteva, A.; Pozhitkova, A.; Rumyantceva, V.; Rumyantceva, V.; Pankov, I.V.; Taskaev, S.; Vinogradov, V.V. Magnetic Soft Robot for Minimally Invasive Urethral Catheter Biofilm Eradication. ACS Nano 2023, 17, 20925–20938. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  193. Koo, H.; Allan, R.N.; Howlin, R.P.; Stoodley, P.; Hall-Stoodley, L. Targeting microbial biofilms: Current and prospective therapeutic strategies. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2017, 15, 740–755. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  194. Cava, R.; de Leon, N.; Xie, W. Introduction: Quantum Materials. Chem. Rev. 2021, 121, 2777–2779. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  195. Tokura, Y.; Kawasaki, M.; Nagaosa, N. Emergent functions of quantum materials. Nat. Phys. 2017, 13, 1056–1068. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  196. Shulga, K.; Il’ichev, E.; Fistul, M.V.; Besedin, I.; Butz, S.; Astafiev, O.; Hübner, U.; Ustinov, A.V. Magnetically induced transparency of a quantum metamaterial composed of twin flux qubits. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  197. Zunger, A. Bridging the gap between density functional theory and quantum materials. Nat. Comput. Sci. 2022, 2, 529–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  198. Thomas, L.H. The calculation of atomic fields. Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1927; Volume 23, pp. 542–548. [Google Scholar]
  199. Hartree, D.R. The wave mechanics of an atom with a non-Coulomb central field. Part I. Theory and methods. In Proceedings of the Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 1928; Volume 24, pp. 89–110. [Google Scholar]
  200. Jones, M.A.; Vallury, H.J.; Hill, C.D.; Hollenberg, L.C. Chemistry beyond the Hartree–Fock energy via quantum computed moments. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 8985. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  201. Sauceda, H.E.; Gálvez-González, L.E.; Chmiela, S.; Paz-Borbón, L.O.; Müller, K.R.; Tkatchenko, A. BIGDML—Towards accurate quantum machine learning force fields for materials. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 3733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  202. Bocus, M.; Goeminne, R.; Lamaire, A.; Cools-Ceuppens, M.; Verstraelen, T.; Van Speybroeck, V. Nuclear quantum effects on zeolite proton hopping kinetics explored with machine learning potentials and path integral molecular dynamics. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 1008. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  203. Wang, X.; Mao, G.; Ge, J.; Drack, M.; Cañón Bermúdez, G.S.; Wirthl, D.; Illing, R.; Kosub, T.; Bischoff, L.; Wang, C.; et al. Untethered and ultrafast soft-bodied robots. Commun. Mater. 2020, 1, 67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  204. Ni, Y.; Sun, Y.; Zhang, H.; Li, X.; Zhang, S.; Li, M. Data-Driven Navigation of Ferromagnetic Soft Continuum Robots Based on Machine Learning. Adv. Intell. Syst. 2023, 5, 2200167. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  205. Liu, Z.; Wang, S.; Feng, F.; Xie, L. A magnetorheological fluid based force feedback master robot for vascular interventional surgery. J. Intell. Robot. Syst. 2022, 106, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  206. Yao, J.; Cao, Q.; Ju, Y.; Sun, Y.; Liu, R.; Han, X.; Li, L. Adaptive actuation of magnetic soft robots using deep reinforcement learning. Adv. Intell. Syst. 2023, 5, 2200339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  207. Featherstone, R. Rigid Body Dynamics Algorithms; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2014. [Google Scholar]
  208. Qin, L.; Peng, H.; Huang, X.; Liu, M.; Huang, W. Modeling and Simulation of Dynamics in Soft Robotics: A Review of Numerical Approaches. Curr. Robot. Rep. 2023, 4, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  209. Tummers, M.; Lebastard, V.; Boyer, F.; Troccaz, J.; Rosa, B.; Chikhaoui, M.T. Cosserat Rod Modeling of Continuum Robots from Newtonian and Lagrangian Perspectives. IEEE Trans. Robot. 2023, 39, 2360–2378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  210. Chikhaoui, M.T.; Lilge, S.; Kleinschmidt, S.; Burgner-Kahrs, J. Comparison of modeling approaches for a tendon actuated continuum robot with three extensible segments. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2019, 4, 989–996. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  211. Dreyfus, R.; Boehler, Q.; Nelson, B.J. A simulation framework for magnetic continuum robots. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2022, 7, 8370–8376. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  212. Mao, G.; Schiller, D.; Danninger, D.; Hailegnaw, B.; Hartmann, F.; Stockinger, T.; Drack, M.; Arnold, N.; Kaltenbrunner, M. Ultrafast small-scale soft electromagnetic robots. Nat. Commun. 2022, 13, 4456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  213. Ju, Y.; Hu, R.; Xie, Y.; Yao, J.; Li, X.; Lv, Y.; Han, X.; Cao, Q.; Li, L. Reconfigurable magnetic soft robots with multimodal locomotion. Nano Energy 2021, 87, 106169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  214. Wang, C.; Wu, Y.; Dong, X.; Armacki, M.; Sitti, M. In situ sensing physiological properties of biological tissues using wireless miniature soft robots. Sci. Adv. 2023, 9, eadg3988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  215. Islam, M.S.; Molley, T.G.; Ireland, J.; Kruzic, J.J.; Kilian, K.A. Magnetic Nanocomposite Hydrogels for Directing Myofibroblast Activity in Adipose-Derived Stem Cells. Adv. Nanobiomed Res. 2021, 1, 2000072. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  216. Bernevig, B.A.; Felser, C.; Beidenkopf, H. Progress and prospects in magnetic topological materials. Nature 2022, 603, 41–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  217. Li, S.S.; Guan, Q.Y.; Meng, G.; Chang, X.F.; Wei, J.W.; Wang, P.; Kang, B.; Xu, J.J.; Chen, H.Y. Revealing chemical processes and kinetics of drug action within single living cells via plasmonic Raman probes. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 2296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  218. Decherchi, S.; Cavalli, A. Thermodynamics and kinetics of drug-target binding by molecular simulation. Chem. Rev. 2020, 120, 12788–12833. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  219. Patle, B.; Pandey, A.; Parhi, D.; Jagadeesh, A.; Babu, G.L. A review: On path planning strategies for navigation of mobile robot. Def. Technol. 2019, 15, 582–606. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  220. Butner, J.D.; Dogra, P.; Chung, C.; Pasqualini, R.; Arap, W.; Lowengrub, J.; Cristini, V.; Wang, Z. Mathematical modeling of cancer immunotherapy for personalized clinical translation. Nat. Comput. Sci. 2022, 2, 785–796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  221. Boissonneault, M.; Vogt, P. A systematic and interdisciplinary review of mathematical models of language competition. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 2021, 8, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  222. Afzal, A.; Saleel, C.A.; Bhattacharyya, S.; Satish, N.; Samuel, O.D.; Badruddin, I.A. Merits and limitations of mathematical modeling and computational simulations in mitigation of COVID-19 pandemic: A comprehensive review. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2022, 29, 1311–1337. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  223. Armingol, E.; Officer, A.; Harismendy, O.; Lewis, N.E. Deciphering cell–cell interactions and communication from gene expression. Nat. Rev. Genet. 2021, 22, 71–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  224. Wu, Z.W.; Chen, Y.; Wang, W.H.; Kob, W.; Xu, L. Topology of vibrational modes predicts plastic events in glasses. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 2955. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  225. Gale, E.M.; Durand, D.J. Improving reaction prediction. Nat. Chem. 2020, 12, 509–510. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  226. Strieth-Kalthoff, F.; Sandfort, F.; Kühnemund, M.; Schäfer, F.R.; Kuchen, H.; Glorius, F. Machine learning for chemical reactivity: The importance of failed experiments. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 2022, 61, e202204647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  227. Kozyra, M.; Ingelman-Sundberg, M.; Lauschke, V.M. Rare genetic variants in cellular transporters, metabolic enzymes, and nuclear receptors can be important determinants of interindividual differences in drug response. Genet. Med. 2017, 19, 20–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  228. Yue, R.; Dutta, A. Computational systems biology in disease modeling and control, review and perspectives. Npj Syst. Biol. Appl. 2022, 8, 37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  229. Lopatkin, A.J.; Collins, J.J. Predictive biology: Modelling, understanding and harnessing microbial complexity. Nat. Rev. Microbiol. 2020, 18, 507–520. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  230. Atwi, R.; Bliss, M.; Makeev, M.; Rajput, N.N. MISPR: An open-source package for high-throughput multiscale molecular simulations. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 15760. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  231. Bishara, D.; Xie, Y.; Liu, W.K.; Li, S. A state-of-the-art review on machine learning-based multiscale modeling, simulation, homogenization and design of materials. Arch. Comput. Methods Eng. 2023, 30, 191–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  232. St. John, P.C.; Guan, Y.; Kim, Y.; Etz, B.D.; Kim, S.; Paton, R.S. Quantum chemical calculations for over 200,000 organic radical species and 40,000 associated closed-shell molecules. Sci. Data 2020, 7, 244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  233. Sumiya, Y.; Harabuchi, Y.; Nagata, Y.; Maeda, S. Quantum chemical calculations to trace back reaction paths for the prediction of reactants. JACS Au 2022, 2, 1181–1188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  234. Matera, S.; Schneider, W.F.; Heyden, A.; Savara, A. Progress in accurate chemical kinetic modeling, simulations, and parameter estimation for heterogeneous catalysis. ACS Catal. 2019, 9, 6624–6647. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  235. Strianese, O.; Rizzo, F.; Ciccarelli, M.; Galasso, G.; D’Agostino, Y.; Salvati, A.; Del Giudice, C.; Tesorio, P.; Rusciano, M.R. Precision and personalized medicine: How genomic approach improves the management of cardiovascular and neurodegenerative disease. Genes 2020, 11, 747. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  236. Cecchin, E.; Stocco, G. Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine. Genes 2020, 11, 679. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  237. Landeck, L.; Kneip, C.; Reischl, J.; Asadullah, K. Biomarkers and personalized medicine: Current status and further perspectives with special focus on dermatology. Exp. Dermatol. 2016, 25, 333–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  238. Michalec, O.; O’Donovan, C.; Sobhani, M. What is robotics made of The interdisciplinary politics of robotics research. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 2021, 8, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  239. Yoerger, D.R.; Govindarajan, A.F.; Howland, J.C.; Llopiz, J.K.; Wiebe, P.H.; Curran, M.; Fujii, J.; Gomez-Ibanez, D.; Katija, K.; Robison, B.H.; et al. A hybrid underwater robot for multidisciplinary investigation of the ocean twilight zone. Sci. Robot. 2021, 6, eabe1901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  240. Kluger, M.O.; Bartzke, G. A practical guideline how to tackle interdisciplinarity—A synthesis from a post-graduate group project. Humanit. Soc. Sci. Commun. 2020, 7, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  241. Dalton, A.; Wolff, K.; Bekker, B. Interdisciplinary Research as a Complicated System. Int. J. Qual. Methods 2022, 21, 16094069221100397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  242. Hasan, M.N.; Koksal, C.; Montel, L.; Le Gouais, A.; Barnfield, A.; Bates, G.; Kwon, H.R. Developing shared understanding through online interdisciplinary collaboration: Reflections from a research project on better integration of health outcomes in future urban development practice. Futures 2023, 150, 103176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  243. Avsec, Ž.; Agarwal, V.; Visentin, D.; Ledsam, J.R.; Grabska-Barwinska, A.; Taylor, K.R.; Assael, Y.; Jumper, J.; Kohli, P.; Kelley, D.R. Effective gene expression prediction from sequence by integrating long-range interactions. Nat. Methods 2021, 18, 1196–1203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  244. Alsteens, D.; Gaub, H.E.; Newton, R.; Pfreundschuh, M.; Gerber, C.; Müller, D.J. Atomic force microscopy-based characterization and design of biointerfaces. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2017, 2, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  245. Li, M.; Xi, N.; Wang, Y.C.; Liu, L.Q. Atomic force microscopy for revealing micro/nanoscale mechanics in tumor metastasis: From single cells to microenvironmental cues. Acta Pharmacol. Sin. 2021, 42, 323–339. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  246. Hanay, M.S.; Kelber, S.; Naik, A.; Chi, D.; Hentz, S.; Bullard, E.; Colinet, E.; Duraffourg, L.; Roukes, M. Single-protein nanomechanical mass spectrometry in real time. Nat. Nanotechnol. 2012, 7, 602–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  247. Najafabadi, M.M.; Villanustre, F.; Khoshgoftaar, T.M.; Seliya, N.; Wald, R.; Muharemagic, E. Deep learning applications and challenges in big data analytics. J. Big Data 2015, 2, 1–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  248. Collin, C.B.; Gebhardt, T.; Golebiewski, M.; Karaderi, T.; Hillemanns, M.; Khan, F.M.; Salehzadeh-Yazdi, A.; Kirschner, M.; Krobitsch, S.; consortium, E.S.; et al. Computational models for clinical applications in personalized medicine—Guidelines and recommendations for data integration and model validation. J. Pers. Med. 2022, 12, 166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  249. Dupont, P.E.; Nelson, B.J.; Goldfarb, M.; Hannaford, B.; Menciassi, A.; O’Malley, M.K.; Simaan, N.; Valdastri, P.; Yang, G.Z. A decade retrospective of medical robotics research from 2010 to 2020. Sci. Robot. 2021, 6, eabi8017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  250. Shentu, C.; Li, E.; Chen, C.; Dewi, P.T.; Lindell, D.B.; Burgner-Kahrs, J. MoSS: Monocular Shape Sensing for Continuum Robots. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2023, 9, 1524–1531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  251. Riccardi, A.; Furtado, G.P.; Sikorski, J.; Vendittelli, M.; Misra, S. Field Model Identification and Control of a Mobile Electromagnet for Remote Actuation of Soft Robots. IEEE Robot. Autom. Lett. 2023, 8, 4092–4098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  252. Jin, D.; Wang, Q.; Chan, K.F.; Xia, N.; Yang, H.; Wang, Q.; Yu, S.C.H.; Zhang, L. Swarming self-adhesive microgels enabled aneurysm on-demand embolization in physiological blood flow. Sci. Adv. 2023, 9, eadf9278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  253. Miriyev, A.; Kovač, M. Skills for physical artificial intelligence. Nat. Mach. Intell. 2020, 2, 658–660. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  254. Johnson, B.; Naris, M.; Sundaram, V.; Volchko, A.; Ly, K.; Mitchell, S.; Acome, E.; Kellaris, N.; Keplinger, C.; Correll, N.; et al. A multifunctional soft robotic shape display with high-speed actuation, sensing, and control. Nat. Commun. 2023, 14, 4516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  255. Cianchetti, M.; Laschi, C.; Menciassi, A.; Dario, P. Biomedical applications of soft robotics. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2018, 3, 143–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  256. Russo, M.; Sadati, S.M.H.; Dong, X.; Mohammad, A.; Walker, I.D.; Bergeles, C.; Xu, K.; Axinte, D.A. Continuum robots: An overview. Adv. Intell. Syst. 2023, 5, 2200367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  257. Sun, J.Y.; Zhao, X.; Illeperuma, W.R.; Chaudhuri, O.; Oh, K.H.; Mooney, D.J.; Vlassak, J.J.; Suo, Z. Highly stretchable and tough hydrogels. Nature 2012, 489, 133–136. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  258. Hong, S.; Sycks, D.; Chan, H.F.; Lin, S.; Lopez, G.P.; Guilak, F.; Leong, K.W.; Zhao, X. 3D printing of highly stretchable and tough hydrogels into complex, cellularized structures. Adv. Mater. 2015, 27, 4035–4040. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  259. Yuk, H.; Zhang, T.; Lin, S.; Parada, G.A.; Zhao, X. Tough bonding of hydrogels to diverse non-porous surfaces. Nat. Mater. 2016, 15, 190–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  260. Gonzalez, M.A.; Simon, J.R.; Ghoorchian, A.; Scholl, Z.; Lin, S.; Rubinstein, M.; Marszalek, P.; Chilkoti, A.; López, G.P.; Zhao, X. Strong, tough, stretchable, and self-adhesive hydrogels from intrinsically unstructured proteins. Adv. Mater. 2017, 29, 1604743. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  261. Yuk, H.; Lin, S.; Ma, C.; Takaffoli, M.; Fang, N.X.; Zhao, X. Hydraulic hydrogel actuators and robots optically and sonically camouflaged in water. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 14230. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  262. Zhou, T.; Yuk, H.; Hu, F.; Wu, J.; Tian, F.; Roh, H.; Shen, Z.; Gu, G.; Xu, J.; Lu, B.; et al. 3D printable high-performance conducting polymer hydrogel for all-hydrogel bioelectronic interfaces. Nat. Mater. 2023, 22, 895–902. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  263. Yuk, H.; Lu, B.; Zhao, X. Hydrogel bioelectronics. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2019, 48, 1642–1667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  264. Wang, Q.; Suo, Z.; Zhao, X. Bursting drops in solid dielectrics caused by high voltages. Nat. Commun. 2012, 3, 1157. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  265. Lin, S.; Cao, C.; Wang, Q.; Gonzalez, M.; Dolbow, J.E.; Zhao, X. Design of stiff, tough and stretchy hydrogel composites via nanoscale hybrid crosslinking and macroscale fiber reinforcement. Soft Matter 2014, 10, 7519–7527. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  266. Zhang, J.; Zhao, X.; Suo, Z.; Jiang, H. A finite element method for transient analysis of concurrent large deformation and mass transport in gels. J. Appl. Phys. 2009, 105, 093522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  267. Zhao, X. A theory for large deformation and damage of interpenetrating polymer networks. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 2012, 60, 319–332. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  268. Huebsch, N.; Kearney, C.J.; Zhao, X.; Kim, J.; Cezar, C.A.; Suo, Z.; Mooney, D.J. Ultrasound-triggered disruption and self-healing of reversibly cross-linked hydrogels for drug delivery and enhanced chemotherapy. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 9762–9767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  269. Yuk, H.; Zhao, X. A new 3D printing strategy by harnessing deformation, instability, and fracture of viscoelastic inks. Adv. Mater. 2018, 30, 1704028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  270. Liu, X.; Yuk, H.; Lin, S.; Parada, G.A.; Tang, T.C.; Tham, E.; de la Fuente-Nunez, C.; Lu, T.K.; Zhao, X. 3D printing of living responsive materials and devices. Adv. Mater. 2018, 30, 1704821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  271. Mao, Y.; Lin, S.; Zhao, X.; Anand, L. A large deformation viscoelastic model for double-network hydrogels. J. Mech. Phys. Solids 2017, 100, 103–130. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  272. Zhao, X. Multi-scale multi-mechanism design of tough hydrogels: Building dissipation into stretchy networks. Soft Matter 2014, 10, 672–687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  273. Zhao, X. Designing toughness and strength for soft materials. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2017, 114, 8138–8140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  274. Wang, L.; Zheng, D.; Harker, P.; Patel, A.B.; Guo, C.F.; Zhao, X. Evolutionary design of magnetic soft continuum robots. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2021, 118, e2021922118. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  275. Wang, H.; Zhu, Z.; Jin, H.; Wei, R.; Bi, L.; Zhang, W. Magnetic soft robots: Design, actuation, and function. J. Alloy Compd. 2022, 922, 166219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  276. Liu, X.; Rao, S.; Chen, W.; Felix, K.; Ni, J.; Sahasrabudhe, A.; Lin, S.; Wang, Q.; Liu, Y.; He, Z.; et al. Fatigue-resistant hydrogel optical fibers enable peripheral nerve optogenetics during locomotion. Nat. Methods 2023, 20, 1802–1809. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  277. Yuk, H.; Lu, B.; Lin, S.; Qu, K.; Xu, J.; Luo, J.; Zhao, X. 3D printing of conducting polymers. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 1604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  278. Yuk, H.; Wu, J.; Zhao, X. Hydrogel interfaces for merging humans and machines. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2022, 7, 935–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  279. Deng, J.; Yuk, H.; Wu, J.; Varela, C.E.; Chen, X.; Roche, E.T.; Guo, C.F.; Zhao, X. Electrical bioadhesive interface for bioelectronics. Nat. Mater. 2021, 20, 229–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  280. Wu, J.; Yuk, H.; Sarrafian, T.L.; Guo, C.F.; Griffiths, L.G.; Nabzdyk, C.S.; Zhao, X. An off-the-shelf bioadhesive patch for sutureless repair of gastrointestinal defects. Sci. Transl. Med. 2022, 14, eabh2857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  281. Gu, G.; Zhang, N.; Xu, H.; Lin, S.; Yu, Y.; Chai, G.; Ge, L.; Yang, H.; Shao, Q.; Sheng, X.; et al. A soft neuroprosthetic hand providing simultaneous myoelectric control and tactile feedback. Nat. Biomed. Eng. 2023, 7, 589–598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  282. Wang, C.; Chen, X.; Wang, L.; Makihata, M.; Liu, H.C.; Zhou, T.; Zhao, X. Bioadhesive ultrasound for long-term continuous imaging of diverse organs. Science 2022, 377, 517–523. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  283. Thirunavukarasu, A.J.; Ting, D.S.J.; Elangovan, K.; Gutierrez, L.; Tan, T.F.; Ting, D.S.W. Large language models in medicine. Nat. Med. 2023, 29, 1930–1940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  284. Li, M.; Tang, Y.; Soon, R.H.; Dong, B.; Hu, W.; Sitti, M. Miniature coiled artificial muscle for wireless soft medical devices. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8, eabm5616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  285. Yang, Y.; Wang, J.; Wang, L.; Wu, Q.; Ling, L.; Yang, Y.; Ning, S.; Xie, Y.; Cao, Q.; Li, L.; et al. Magnetic soft robotic bladder for assisted urination. Sci. Adv. 2022, 8, eabq1456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  286. Zhang, C.; Li, X.; Jiang, L.; Tang, D.; Xu, H.; Zhao, P.; Fu, J.; Zhou, Q.; Chen, Y. 3D printing of functional magnetic materials: From design to applications. Adv. Funct. Mater. 2021, 31, 2102777. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  287. Sydney Gladman, A.; Matsumoto, E.A.; Nuzzo, R.G.; Mahadevan, L.; Lewis, J.A. Biomimetic 4D printing. Nat. Mater. 2016, 15, 413–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  288. Li, J.; Pumera, M. 3D printing of functional microrobots. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2021, 50, 2794–2838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  289. Lee, Y.; Koehler, F.; Dillon, T.; Loke, G.; Kim, Y.; Marion, J.; Antonini, M.J.; Garwood, I.C.; Sahasrabudhe, A.; Nagao, K.; et al. Magnetically Actuated Fiber-Based Soft Robots. Adv. Mater. 2023, 35, 2301916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  290. Liu, Y.; Zhou, Y.; Qin, H.; Yang, T.; Chen, X.; Li, L.; Han, Z.; Wang, K.; Zhang, B.; Lu, W.; et al. Electro-thermal actuation in percolative ferroelectric polymer nanocomposites. Nat. Mater. 2023, 22, 873–879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  291. Roy, A.; Loebel, C. Magnetic soft robotics to manipulate the extracellular matrix in vitro. Cell 2023, 186, 4992–4993. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  292. Rios, B.; Bu, A.; Sheehan, T.; Kobeissi, H.; Kohli, S.; Shah, K.; Lejeune, E.; Raman, R. Mechanically programming anisotropy in engineered muscle with actuating extracellular matrices. Device 2023, 1, 100097. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  293. Dhirani, L.L.; Mukhtiar, N.; Chowdhry, B.S.; Newe, T. Ethical dilemmas and privacy issues in emerging technologies: A review. Sensors 2023, 23, 1151. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  294. Razek, R.M.A.M.A. Criminal Responsibility for Errors Committed by Medical Robots: Legal and Ethical Challenges. J. Law Sustain. Dev. 2024, 12, e2443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 2. Numerical methods perspective. Numerical methods are pivotal in transforming theoretical models into executable computational paradigms. This process is paramount in interdisciplinary domains such as robotics, which involves converting abstract theoretical concepts into practical computational procedures. From the perspective of basis functions, we categorize numerical methods into three primary classifications: basis function methods, zero basis function methods, and hybrid zero basis methods. This categorization not only aids in identifying and comprehending the characteristics and applicable contexts of various numerical techniques but also highlights their central role in interdisciplinary, integrated analysis. For instance, in robotics, these methods facilitate more precise simulation and analysis of robotic dynamics, sensory systems, and environmental interactions. By delving into the role of these numerical methods, including developing disciplines, we enhance our understanding of these techniques and establish a more robust and efficient computational foundation for robotics and a broader spectrum of scientific disciplines.
Figure 2. Numerical methods perspective. Numerical methods are pivotal in transforming theoretical models into executable computational paradigms. This process is paramount in interdisciplinary domains such as robotics, which involves converting abstract theoretical concepts into practical computational procedures. From the perspective of basis functions, we categorize numerical methods into three primary classifications: basis function methods, zero basis function methods, and hybrid zero basis methods. This categorization not only aids in identifying and comprehending the characteristics and applicable contexts of various numerical techniques but also highlights their central role in interdisciplinary, integrated analysis. For instance, in robotics, these methods facilitate more precise simulation and analysis of robotic dynamics, sensory systems, and environmental interactions. By delving into the role of these numerical methods, including developing disciplines, we enhance our understanding of these techniques and establish a more robust and efficient computational foundation for robotics and a broader spectrum of scientific disciplines.
Micromachines 15 00313 g002
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Wang, H.; Mao, Y.; Du, J. Continuum Robots and Magnetic Soft Robots: From Models to Interdisciplinary Challenges for Medical Applications. Micromachines 2024, 15, 313. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi15030313

AMA Style

Wang H, Mao Y, Du J. Continuum Robots and Magnetic Soft Robots: From Models to Interdisciplinary Challenges for Medical Applications. Micromachines. 2024; 15(3):313. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi15030313

Chicago/Turabian Style

Wang, Honghong, Yi Mao, and Jingli Du. 2024. "Continuum Robots and Magnetic Soft Robots: From Models to Interdisciplinary Challenges for Medical Applications" Micromachines 15, no. 3: 313. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi15030313

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop