MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402350775 · doi:10.1109/lra.2024.3455907

Tailoring Solution Accuracy for Fast Whole-Body Model Predictive Control of Legged Robots

2024· article· en· W4402350775 on OpenAlex

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.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Locomotion and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFonds de recherche du Québec – Nature et technologiesNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsModel predictive controlRobotComputer scienceControl (management)Artificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Thanks to recent advancements in accelerating non-linear model predictive control (NMPC), it is now feasible to deploy whole-body NMPC at real-time rates for humanoid robots. However, enforcing inequality constraints in real time for such high-dimensional systems remains challenging due to the need for additional iterations. This letter presents an implementation of whole-body NMPC for legged robots that provides low-accuracy solutions to NMPC with general equality and inequality constraints. Instead of aiming for highly accurate optimal solutions, we leverage the alternating direction method of multipliers to rapidly provide low-accuracy solutions to quadratic programming subproblems. Our extensive simulation results indicate that real robots often cannot benefit from highly accurate solutions due to dynamics discretization errors, inertial modeling errors and delays. We incorporate control barrier functions (CBFs) at the initial timestep of the NMPC for the self-collision constraints, resulting in up to a 26-fold reduction in the number of self-collisions without adding computational burden. The controller is reliably deployed on hardware at 90 Hz for a problem involving 32 timesteps, 2004 variables, and 3768 constraints. The NMPC delivers sufficiently accurate solutions, enabling the MIT Humanoid to plan complex crossed-leg and arm motions that enhance stability when walking and recovering from significant disturbances.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.985
Threshold uncertainty score0.655

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
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 science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.215 · 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