MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412940638 · doi:10.1063/5.0273567

Multifunctional physical reservoir computing in soft tensegrity robots

2025· article· en· W4412940638 on OpenAlexaff
Ryo Terajima, Katsuma Inoue, Kohei Nakajima, Yasuo Kuniyoshi

Bibliographic record

VenueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicNeural Networks and Reservoir Computing
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersCore Research for Evolutional Science and TechnologyJapan Society for the Promotion of Science
KeywordsAttractorRobotTensegrityPhysical systemComputer scienceControl engineeringCyber-physical systemReservoir computingNonlinear systemEmbodied cognitionState spaceCognitive roboticsArtificial intelligenceEngineeringArtificial neural networkPhysicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Recent studies have demonstrated that the dynamics of physical systems can be utilized for the desired information processing under the framework of physical reservoir computing (PRC). Robots with soft bodies are examples of such physical systems, and their nonlinear body-environment dynamics can be used to compute and generate the motor signals necessary for the control of their own behavior. In this simulation study, we extend this approach to control and embed not only one but also multiple behaviors into a type of soft robot called a tensegrity robot. The resulting system, consisting of the robot and the environment, is a multistable dynamical system that converges to different attractors from varying initial conditions. Furthermore, attractor analysis reveals that there exist "untrained attractors" in the state space of the system outside the training data. These untrained attractors reflect the intrinsic properties and structures of the tensegrity robot and its interactions with the environment. The impacts of these recent findings in PRC remain unexplored in embodied artificial intelligence research. We here illustrate their potential to understand various features of embodied cognition that have not been fully addressed to date.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.326 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations8
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChaos An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear ScienceSame topicNeural Networks and Reservoir ComputingFrench-language works237,207