On the Conic Complementarity of Planar Contacts
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a unifying theoretical result that connects two foundational principles in robotics: the Signorini law for point contacts, which underpins many simulation methods for preventing object interpenetration, and the center of pressure (also known as the zero-moment point), a key concept used in, for instance, optimization-based locomotion control. Our contribution is the planar Signorini condition, a conic complementarity formulation that models general planar contacts between rigid bodies. We prove that this formulation is equivalent to enforcing the punctual Signorini law across an entire contact surface, thereby bridging the gap between discrete and continuous contact models. A geometric interpretation reveals that the framework naturally captures three physical regimes -sticking, separating, and tilting-within a unified complementarity structure. This leads to a principled extension of the classical center of pressure, which we refer to as the extended center of pressure. By establishing this connection, our work provides a mathematically consistent and computationally tractable foundation for handling planar contacts, with implications for both the accurate simulation of contact dynamics and the design of advanced control and optimization algorithms in locomotion and manipulation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it