A model-free deep reinforcement learning approach for control of exoskeleton gait patterns
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
Abstract Lower-body exoskeleton control that adapts to users and provides assistance-as-needed can increase user participation and motor learning and allow for more effective gait rehabilitation. Adaptive model-based control methods have previously been developed to consider a user’s interaction with an exoskeleton; however, the predefined dynamics models required are challenging to define accurately, due to the complex dynamics and nonlinearities of the human-exoskeleton interaction. Model-free deep reinforcement learning (DRL) approaches can provide accurate and robust control in robotics applications and have shown potential for lower-body exoskeletons. In this paper, we present a new model-free DRL method for end-to-end learning of desired gait patterns for over-ground gait rehabilitation with an exoskeleton. This control technique is the first to accurately track any gait pattern desired in physiotherapy without requiring a predefined dynamics model and is robust to varying post-stroke individuals’ baseline gait patterns and their interactions and perturbations. Simulated experiments of an exoskeleton paired to a musculoskeletal model show that the DRL method is robust to different post-stroke users and is able to accurately track desired gait pattern trajectories both seen and unseen in training.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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