MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

AN OPTIMAL CONTROL OF BIPED ROBOT FOR HUMAN-LIKE WALKING

2013· article· en· W2070446356 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
J. K., Ravi Prakash Tewari, Dinesh Chandra

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Robotics and Automation · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicControl and Dynamics of Mobile Robots
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiped robotComputer scienceRobotControl (management)Control theory (sociology)Physical medicine and rehabilitationArtificial intelligenceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents an optimal control of biped robot for humanlike walking.A mathematical dynamic model of biped robot having seven links i.e., thigh, shank and foot for each leg and one link representing entire upper body i.e., torso is considered here.The Lagrange-Euler formulation is used to obtain the dynamic equations of motion for calculating torques at various joints.As the dynamics of leg is a highly complex and non-linear system with several uncertainties, a robust tracking controller that guarantee the performance is required.Polynomial trajectory used as reference trajectory is based on gait cycle of human walking data.First a robust controller is designed using an algebraic Riccati equation.This robust tracking controller is designed as an optimal controller, where the uncertainties are incorporated in design of optimal controller.The simulation result shows that the proposed controller can be used to control level walking of a biped robot just like human even with bounded uncertainties.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Robotics and AutomationSame topicControl and Dynamics of Mobile RobotsFrench-language works237,207