Reinforcement Learning for Control of Human Locomotion in Simulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Control of robotic leg prostheses and exoskeletons is an open challenge. Computer modeling and simulation can be used to study the dynamics and control of human walking and extract principles that can be programmed into robotic legs to behave similar to biological legs. In this study, we present the development of an efficient two-layer Q-learning algorithm, with k-d trees, that operates over continuous action spaces and a reward model that estimates the degree of muscle activation similarity between the agent and human state-to-action pairs and state-to-action sequences. We used a human musculoskeletal model acting in a high-dimensional, physics-based simulation environment to train and evaluate our algorithm to simulate biomimetic walking. We used imitation learning and artificial bio-mechanics data to accelerate training via expert demonstrations and used experimental human data to compare and validate our predictive simulations, achieving 79% accuracy. Also, when compared to the previous state-of-the-art that used deep deterministic policy gradient, our algorithm was significantly more efficient with lower computational and memory storage requirements (i.e., requiring 7 times less RAM and 87 times less CPU compute), which can benefit real-time embedded computing. Overall, our new two-layer Q-learning algorithm using sequential data for continuous imitation of human locomotion serves as a first step towards the development of bioinspired controllers for robotic prosthetic legs and exoskeletons. Future work will focus on improving the prediction accuracy compared to experimental data and expanding our simulations to other locomotor activities.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".