MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415355139 · doi:10.1016/j.cag.2025.104457

Imitation in relative terms using ReGAIL: Making motion controllers agile and transferable

2025· article· en· W4415355139 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueComputers & Graphics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicHuman Motion and Animation
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersConseil National de la Recherche ScientifiqueCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique
KeywordsControl theory (sociology)NoveltyRobustness (evolution)RobotTrajectoryController (irrigation)Agile software developmentHumanoid robotGenerator (circuit theory)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present an approach for training “agile” character control policies, able to produce a wide variety of motor skills from a single reference motion cycle. Our technique builds off of generative adversarial imitation learning (GAIL), with a key novelty of our approach being to provide modification to the observation map in order to improve agility and robustness. Namely, to support more agile behavior, we adjust the value measurements of the training discriminator through relative features - hence the name ReGAIL. Our state observations include both task relevant relative velocities and poses, as well as relative goal deviation information. In addition, to increase robustness of the resulting gaits, servo gains and damping values are included as part of the policy action to let the controller learn how to best combine tension and relaxation during motion. From a policy informed by a single reference motion, our resulting agent is able to maneuver as needed, at runtime, from walking forward to walking backward or sideways, turning and stepping nimbly. Moreover, thanks to the use of observations in relative frames, the trained controllers are robust to morphological changes of the simulated character, which makes adaptation to new morphologies straightforward. We demonstrate our approach for a humanoid and a quadruped, on both flat and sloped terrains, as well as provide ablation studies to validate the design choices of our framework. In addition, we present an application to prehistoric research, where being able to simulate hominids of specific morphologies on rough terrain is valuable with encouraging results.

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 score0.592
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.226 · 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