MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2050501300 · doi:10.1115/imece2004-60217

Impact Dynamics and Parametric Study of the Contact Event for Biped Robots

2004· article· en· W2050501300 on OpenAlexaff
Xiuping Mu, Qiong Wu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Locomotion and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImpulse (physics)Control theory (sociology)Parametric statisticsKinematicsComputer scienceWork (physics)MechanicsSlippageSimulationRobotMathematicsPhysicsClassical mechanicsEngineeringStructural engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the impact dynamics and its effects on the contact event of a five-link biped walking on level ground are studied. The dynamic equations of both single and double impact of the biped are derived using the Newtonian approach. We improved the conventional five-link biped kinematic model such that, for the first time, the explicit solutions of the external impulses and post impact angular velocities are presented in detailed but compact form. These solutions are used conveniently to evaluate the conditions that warrant each individual type of impact. A parametric study is performed to correlate the type of impact with certain gait parameters and the results are presented in graphical form in the parameter space. Effects of variations in the parameters on the vertical impulse and post impact velocity of the trailing tip are further investigated. The ratio of the vertical and horizontal impulses is also examined, which shows the likelihood of slippage of the foot (feet). This work reveals important physical insights into the mechanisms of biped impact and facilitates motion planning and motion regulation of biped locomotion with prescribed contact phases.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.428
Threshold uncertainty score0.164

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.237 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Locomotion and ControlFrench-language works237,207