MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Towards Humanoids Using Personal Transporters: Learning to Ride a Segway from Humans

2022· article· en· W4312597101 on OpenAlexaff
Vidyasagar Rajendran, Jonathan Feng-Shun Lin, Katja Mombaur

Bibliographic record

Venue2022 9th IEEE RAS/EMBS International Conference for Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob) · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Locomotion and Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInverted pendulumHumanoid robotController (irrigation)Flexibility (engineering)RobotComputer scienceControl theory (sociology)SimulationControl engineeringControl (management)Artificial intelligenceEngineeringPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Human bipedal locomotion is efficient, robust and versatile, but typically reserved to reach targets in the close vicinity. As soon as larger distances have to be covered, humans tend to rely on wheeled modes of transport in the form of cars, bikes, scooters etc. Having the flexibility to choose a personal transporter (PT) such as a Segway when needed, is also an interesting option for humanoids operating in the real world, but it requires the ability to control a device that has its own complex dynamics. In this paper, we synthesize controllers for the the humanoid robot REEM-C to ride a Segway in simulation, motivated by human Segway riding. We perform motion capture experiments of a human riding a Segway and identify human whole-body behavior as well as the Segway's internal controllers. We then show that the REEM-C can successfully generate translational, rotational and mixed motions of the Segway in simulation. The Segway is controlled by targeted motions of the REEM-C using an inverted pendulum based LQR controller for pitch control and an admittance controller for the LeanSteer to command a yaw-rate. After these promising simulation results, the next step will be implementation on a real Segway and the REEM-C humanoid.

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: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2022 9th IEEE RAS/EMBS International Conference for Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (BioRob)Same topicRobotic Locomotion and ControlFrench-language works237,207