Difference: RunWalk (10 vs. 11)

Revision 112006-03-22 - batty

Line: 1 to 1

META TOPICPARENT	name="CPSC526ComputerAnimation"

-- MichielVanDePanne - 27 Feb 2006

Line: 24 to 24

(Animation of Dynamic Legged Locomotion) The authors state that the motions described in the paper are physically realistic. It is hard to tell without seeing a animation, but I am guessing that control methods as well as any other methods could generate a non-realistic motion, and it is up to the implementation to dictate the motion “quality”. It would be interesting for me to discuss/analyze that point. Another question is whether physicaly based motion is a realistic one and vice versa. – Hagit Schechter

Added:

>
>

My only real complaint is that I'm more interested in creatures that learn to walk or develop these locomotion abilities based on some goal. Simply (or complexly) copying the control mechanisms of existing animals is somewhat interesting, but only insofar as it allows us to divine general rules for locomotion of complex systems, so we can extend beyond duplicating motion of existing creatures. (And, looking at it closer now, they do mention in passing that they hope eventually to be able to design better robots using knowledge gained in this way.) "Hard-coding" this control system with finite state machines seems only one step up from hand-animating the motion, except that it will realistically account for physics. Although perhaps learning from the ground up how to control such a complex systgem is another case of the high dimensionality of the system resulting in local minima that don't give a good global solution. --Christopher

Paper Two

Line: 42 to 44

I'm a little confused about the term "open-loop": in section 5.1, this FSM uses foot-contact sensors to decide when to make state transitions, but isn't open-loop sensor-less (I retract this, in my skimming I didn't see the comment that it is only quasi-open-loop)? Also, what happens if one of the stages takes too long? It seems like the timing has been handcrafted to prevent that (giving each stage more than they need to complete), but what if? Could you talk a little more about why the biped falls over in figure 10? -- DanielEaton

Added:

>
>

What are the equations of motion that are generated by this commercial package? How much harder is it to extend these ideas into the "Real" world. Ie. what difficulties would we face trying to build a robot that does this, as opposed to just an idealized simulation? Why don't we see walking human robots all over the place, yet? This is a nifty technique for generating motion that seems intelligent but doesn't really have a lot of "real" smarts under the hood. How far can we perturb the system, and still have it return to the natural walk cycle without doing anything unrealistic? --Christopher

View topic | History: r12 < r11 < r10 < r9 | More topic actions...