Diffusion-based learning of contact plans for agile locomotion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Legged robots have become capable of performing highly dynamic maneuvers in the past few years. However, agile locomotion in highly constrained environments such as stepping stones is still a challenge. In this paper, we propose a combination of model-based control, search, and learning to design efficient control policies for agile locomotion on stepping stones. In our framework, we use nonlinear model predictive control (NMPC) to generate whole-body motions for a given contact plan. To efficiently search for an optimal contact plan, we propose to use Monte Carlo tree search (MCTS). While the combination of MCTS and NMPC can quickly find a feasible plan for a given environment (a few seconds), it is not yet suitable to be used as a reactive policy. Hence, we generate a dataset for optimal goal-conditioned policy for a given scene and learn it through supervised learning. In particular, we leverage the power of diffusion models in handling multi-modality in the dataset. We test our proposed framework on a scenario where our quadruped robot Solo12 successfully jumps to different goals in a highly constrained environment (video).
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".