VOCALoco: Viability-Optimized Cost-Aware Adaptive Locomotion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent advancements in legged robot locomotion have facilitated traversal over increasingly complex terrains. Despite this progress, many existing approaches rely on end-to-end deep reinforcement learning (DRL), which poses limitations in terms of safety and interpretability, especially when generalizing to novel terrains. To overcome these challenges, we introduce VOCALoco, a modular skill-selection framework that dynamically adapts locomotion strategies based on perceptual input. Given a set of pre-trained locomotion policies, VOCALoco evaluates their viability and energy-consumption by predicting both the safety of execution and the anticipated cost of transport over a fixed planning horizon. This joint assessment enables the selection of policies that are both safe and energy-efficient, given the observed local terrain. We evaluate our approach on staircase locomotion tasks, demonstrating its performance in both simulated and real-world scenarios using a quadrupedal robot. Empirical results show that VOCALoco achieves improved robustness and safety during stair ascent and descent compared to a conventional end-to-end DRL policy.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".