MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2154528577 · doi:10.1109/aim.2008.4601722

Bipedal running with nearly-passive flight phases

2008· article· en· W2154528577 on OpenAlexaff
Qinghong Guo, C.J.B. Macnab, J.K. Pieper

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Locomotion and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsZero moment pointJoint (building)Control theory (sociology)Computer scienceRobotGround reaction forceSwingSimulationMoment (physics)Nonlinear systemRobot kinematicsEngineeringHumanoid robotMobile robotArtificial intelligencePhysicsKinematicsStructural engineeringControl (management)Acoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a novel approach which generates running gaits for a bipedal robot model. Inspired by human running, we assume that the flight phase is nearly-passive. Thus, the initial and final joint velocities follow from a static optimization procedure, provided that the boundary joint angles have been picked in advance. Dynamic optimization then produces the two running phases, with a simple collision model predicting the discrete joint velocity changes. Ground reaction forces, the Zero-Moment Point, and foot clearance of the swing leg serve as nonlinear constraints. A biped robot running in simulation demonstrates the effectiveness of the proposed approach.

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

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)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.157 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Locomotion and ControlFrench-language works237,207