A Closed-Loop Shared Control Framework for Legged Robots
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
Shared control, as a combination of human and robot intelligence, has been deemed as a promising direction toward complementing the perception and learning capabilities of legged robots. However, previous works on human–robot control for legged robots are often limited to simple tasks, such as controlling movement direction, posture, or single-leg motion, yet extensive training of the operator is required. To facilitate the transfer of human intelligence to legged robots in unstructured environments, this article presents a user-friendly closed-loop shared control framework. The main novelty is that the operator only needs to make decisions based on the recommendations of the autonomous algorithm, without having to worry about operations or consider contact planning issues. Specifically, a rough navigation path from the operator is smoothed and optimized to generate a path with reduced traversing cost. The traversability of the generated path is assessed using fast Monte Carlo tree search, which is subsequently fed back through an intuitive image interface and force feedback to help the operator make decisions quickly, forming a closed-loop shared control. The simulation and hardware experiments on a hexapod robot show that the proposed framework gives full play to the advantages of human–machine collaboration and improves the performance in terms of learning time from the operator, mission completion time, and success rate than comparison methods.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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