Bibot-U6: A Novel 6-DoF Biped Active Walking Robot - Modeling, Planning and Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Most of current biped robots are active walking platforms. Though they have strong locomotion ability and good adaptability to environments, they have a lot of degrees of freedom (DoFs) and hence result in complex control and high energy consumption. On the other hand, passive or semi-passive walking robots require less DoFs and energy, but their walking capability and robustness are poor. To overcome these shortcomings, we have developed a novel active biped walking robot with only six DoFs. The robot is built with six 1-DoF joint modules and two wheels as the feet. It achieves locomotion in special gaits different from those of traditional biped robots. In this paper, this novel biped robot is introduced, four walking gaits are proposed, the criterion of stable walking is addressed and analyzed, and walking patterns and motion planning are presented. Experiments are carried out to verify the locomotion function, the effectiveness of the presented gaits and to illustrate the features of this novel biped robot. It has been shown that biped active walking may be achieved with only a few DoFs and simple kinematic configuration.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".