Incremental Learning and Memory Consolidation of Whole Body Human Motion Primitives
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ability to learn during continuous and on-line observation would be advantageous for humanoid robots, as it would enable them to learn during co-location and interaction in the human environment. However, when motions are being learned and clustered on-line, there is a trade-off between classification accuracy and the number of training examples, resulting in potential misclassifications both at the motion and hierarchy formation level. This article presents an approach enabling fast on-line incremental learning, combined with an incremental memory consolidation process correcting initial misclassifications and errors in organization, to improve the stability and accuracy of the learned motions, analogous to the memory consolidation process following motor learning observed in humans. Following initial organization, motions are randomly selected for reclassification, at both low and high levels of the hierarchy. If a better reclassification is found, the knowledge structure is reorganized to comply. The approach is validated during incremental acquisition of a motion database containing a variety of full body motions. 1
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.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it