MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2171473077 · doi:10.1109/acc.2006.1656599

Effects of constraints on bipedal balance control

2006· article· en· W2171473077 on OpenAlexaff
Congling Yang, Q. Wu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Locomotion and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)TorqueConstraint (computer-aided design)Center of pressure (fluid mechanics)Balance (ability)Angular velocityWork (physics)Position (finance)Control (management)MathematicsComputer sciencePhysicsMechanicsClassical mechanicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The satisfaction of constraints between the feet and the ground is important during balance control of bipedal standing. In this work, the effects of such constraints on balance control of a simplified two-dimensional biped are studied. The bounds imposed on the control torque due to the constraints are first determined. Such control bounds have significant effects on designing balance control laws and can be used to predict the type of falls. It is also found that the angular velocity plays a crucial role in satisfying the constraints. For the biped under study, the friction constraint determines the critical angular velocity, above which the constraints are violated, but the center of pressure (COP) constraint dictates the bounds of the control torque in a large region around upright position

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.163
Teacher spread0.161 · 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 designBench or experimental
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

Citations10
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobotic Locomotion and ControlFrench-language works237,207