Stability of Mina v2 for Robot-Assisted Balance and Locomotion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The assessment of the risk of falling during robot-assisted locomotion is critical for gait control and operator safety, but has not yet been addressed through a systematic and quantitative approach. In this study, the balance stability of Mina v2, a recently developed powered lower-limb robotic exoskeleton, is evaluated using an algorithmic framework based on center of mass (COM)- and joint-space dynamics. The equivalent mechanical model of the combined human-exoskeleton system in the sagittal plane is established and used for balance stability analysis. The properties of the Linear Linkage Actuator, which is custom-designed for Mina v2, are analyzed to obtain mathematical models of torque-velocity limits, and are implemented as constraint functions in the optimization formulation. For given feet configurations of the robotic exoskeleton during flat ground walking, the algorithm evaluates the maximum allowable COM velocity perturbations along the fore-aft directions at each COM position of the system. The resulting velocity extrema form the contact-specific balance stability boundaries (BSBs) of the combined system in the COM state space, which represent the thresholds between balanced and unbalanced states for given contact configurations. The BSBs are obtained for the operation of Mina v2 without crutches, thus quantifying Mina v2's capability of maintaining balance through the support of the leg(s). Stability boundaries in single and double leg supports are used to analyze the robot's stability performance during flat ground walking experiments, and provide design and control implications for future development of crutch-less robotic exoskeletons.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".