Regenerative effects in the Sit-to-Stand and Stand-to-Sit movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
SUMMARY While Sit-to-Stand and Stand-to-Sit are routine activities and are crucial pre-requisites to walking and running their underlying dynamics are poorly understood. Furthermore, the potential for using these movements to regenerate energy in energy-sensitive devices such as orthoses, prostheses and humanoid robots has never been examined. Insights in this domain can lead to more energy-efficient prosthesis, orthosis and humanoid robot designs. OBJECTIVES : The objectives are two-fold: first, to determine how much energy can be regenerated during standard movements related to transitions between sitting and standing on a scale humanoid model and second, to determine if the chosen actuator could produce better results if the gear ratio were modified. This manuscript's main contribution to the literature is by showing which joint provides the most regenerative effect during transitions between sitting and standing. MODEL DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION : Joint trajectories from existing biomechanics trials of sitting and standing transitions were fed into a 1/10 scale model of a humanoid robot. The robot model, developed in MapleSim, is comprised of standard and off-the-shelf subcomponents, including amplifier, NiMH battery and Robotis Dynamixel RX-28 actuators. RESULTS : Using the RX-28 actuator, the ankle, knee and hip joints all show a degree of regenerative effects, the hip demonstrates the most dramatic levels during the transition from standing to sitting. This contrasts with recent publications which show that the knee has the most important regenerative effects during walking and running. It is also found that for under 3 degree trajectory error the regenerative effect is best for all joints when the gear ratio is increased from the RX-28's 193:1 value to a value of approximately 760:1 for the ankle, 630:1 for the knee and 600:1 for the hip. CONCLUSIONS : During transitions between sitting and standing the greatest potential for regeneration occurs in the hips. Therefore, systems designed to implement regenerative effects between sitting and standing need to include subsystems at the hip for maximum regenerative effects.
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 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".