MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2119171960 · doi:10.1017/s0263574706003183

Robust control of underactuated bipeds using sliding modes

2007· article· en· W2119171960 on OpenAlexaff
Mehdi Nikkhah, Hashem Ashrafiuon, Farbod Fahimi

Bibliographic record

VenueRobotica · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Locomotion and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)UnderactuationTorsoRobustness (evolution)Lyapunov functionComputer scienceActuatorRobotControl (management)Nonlinear systemArtificial intelligencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

SUMMARY The purpose of this paper is to present a robust tracking control algorithm for underactuated biped robots capable of self-balancing in the presence of external disturbances. The biped is modeled as a five-link planar robot with four actuators located at hip and knee joints. A sliding mode control law has been developed for the biped to follow a human-like gait trajectory while keeping the torso nearly upright. The control forces are calculated by defining four first-order sliding surfaces as a linear combination of the torso and the four joint tracking errors. The control approach is shown to guarantee that all trajectories will reach and stay on these surfaces during each step, while the walking cycle stability is maintained through a Lyapunov function. The criteria for asymptotic stability of the surfaces are presented and a numerical search method is implemented for the selection of the corresponding surface parameters. The paper further investigates the robustness of the controller in response to disturbances. Numerical simulations demonstrate the tracking stability of the biped's multistep walk and its human-like response to an external disturbance.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.197 · 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

Citations56
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRoboticaSame topicRobotic Locomotion and ControlFrench-language works237,207