MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253394173 · doi:10.1145/2010324.1964954

Locomotion skills for simulated quadrupeds

2011· article· en· W4253394173 on OpenAlexaff
Stelian Coros, Andrej Karpathy, Ben Jones, Lionel Revéret, Michiel van de Panne

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceWorkspaceKinematicsMorphingSimulationLEAPSMotion captureRobustness (evolution)GaitControl theory (sociology)Motion (physics)RobotArtificial intelligencePhysical medicine and rehabilitationPhysicsControl (management)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We develop an integrated set of gaits and skills for a physics-based simulation of a quadruped. The motion repertoire for our simulated dog includes walk, trot, pace, canter, transverse gallop, rotary gallop, leaps capable of jumping on-and-off platforms and over obstacles, sitting, lying down, standing up, and getting up from a fall. The controllers use a representation based on gait graphs, a dual leg frame model, a flexible spine model, and the extensive use of internal virtual forces applied via the Jacobian transpose. Optimizations are applied to these control abstractions in order to achieve robust gaits and leaps with desired motion styles. The resulting gaits are evaluated for robustness with respect to push disturbances and the traversal of variable terrain. The simulated motions are also compared to motion data captured from a filmed dog.

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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.205 · 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

Citations112
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicHuman Motion and AnimationFrench-language works237,207