MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408914198 · doi:10.1109/icjece.2025.3542792

Joint Compliance Control of Biped Robot Considering Position Tracking and Task Priority

2025· article· en· W4408914198 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sheng Dong, Jingchao Li, Jianrui Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer Engineering · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobotic Locomotion and Control
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompliance (psychology)Task (project management)Position (finance)Computer scienceEngineeringPsychologyBusinessSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this work, we propose a joint force control framework for the stable motion of a humanoid biped robot. In motion planning, nonlinear centroid dynamics is used to generate gait on uneven terrain, which overcomes the limitation of a linear inverted pendulum (IP) model on centroid height. The motion control layer combines multipriority inverse kinematics (MPIK) and multipriority dynamic control (MPDC). The MPIK uses a multipriority inverse kinematics numerical iteration algorithm to calculate joint position command. The MPDC uses a multipriority iterative optimization method based on the task-space dynamics model on the forward path, which does not need preallocation or preoptimization of contact force, does not explicitly control the movement of center of mass (CoM), and tries its best to complete high-priority tasks. Finally, a stable joint compliance force control framework is built, and the introduction of kinematic error information ensures the accurate position tracking of the force control system. The results show that the control strategy completes the task of climbing stairs well and shows a certain antidisturbance ability in standing still and variable speed walking. The maximum disturbance in the sagittal plane can reach 50 N·s (achieved solely by adjusting the position of the pressure center and without using the step stability strategy).

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 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 score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.173 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Electrical and Computer EngineeringSame topicRobotic Locomotion and ControlFrench-language works237,207