Controller Design for Multi‐Skilled Bipedal Characters
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Developing motions for simulated humanoids remains a challenging problem. While there exists a multitude of approaches, few of these are reimplemented or reused by others. The predominant focus of papers in the area remains on algorithmic novelty, due to the difficulty and lack of incentive to more fully explore what can be accomplished within the scope of existing methodologies. We develop a language, based on common features found across physics‐based character animation research, that facilitates the controller authoring process. By specifying motion primitives over a number of phases, our language has been used to design over 25 controllers for motions ranging from simple static balanced poses, to highly dynamic stunts. Controller sequencing is supported in two ways. Naive integration of controllers is achieved by using highly stable pose controllers (such as a standing or squatting) as intermediate transitions. More complex controller connections are automatically learned through an optimization process. The robustness of our system is demonstrated via random walkthroughs of our integrated set of controllers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it