MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739330054 · doi:10.1145/3072959.3073602

DeepLoco

2017· article· en· W2739330054 on OpenAlexaff
Xue Bin Peng, Glen Berseth, KangKang Yin, Michiel van de Panne

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Locomotion and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceTerrainReinforcement learningExploitRobustness (evolution)Artificial intelligenceVariety (cybernetics)Controller (irrigation)Control engineeringEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning physics-based locomotion skills is a difficult problem, leading to solutions that typically exploit prior knowledge of various forms. In this paper we aim to learn a variety of environment-aware locomotion skills with a limited amount of prior knowledge. We adopt a two-level hierarchical control framework. First, low-level controllers are learned that operate at a fine timescale and which achieve robust walking gaits that satisfy stepping-target and style objectives. Second, high-level controllers are then learned which plan at the timescale of steps by invoking desired step targets for the low-level controller. The high-level controller makes decisions directly based on high-dimensional inputs, including terrain maps or other suitable representations of the surroundings. Both levels of the control policy are trained using deep reinforcement learning. Results are demonstrated on a simulated 3D biped. Low-level controllers are learned for a variety of motion styles and demonstrate robustness with respect to force-based disturbances, terrain variations, and style interpolation. High-level controllers are demonstrated that are capable of following trails through terrains, dribbling a soccer ball towards a target location, and navigating through static or dynamic obstacles.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.011

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations512
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicRobotic Locomotion and ControlFrench-language works237,207