Demonstration venue · read-only. Every page can be browsed; the buttons that would change it are switched off. Create an account to run TaxoReview on your own data. A simulation from public publication records: the people listed were not invited and did not agree to review.
? Tutorial for this page

Pieter van Zutven

dblp:35/8724 · DBLP profile ↗
← Back
2ranked-venue papers
1as first author
0since 2021 · last 2013
—ORCID · none

Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several

Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 2 · 1 first-authorSystems, architecture and hardware · 2 · 1 first-author

Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.

Artificial intelligence
2 papers
Legged, aerial and field robots · 55% Motion planning and robot control · 40% Trustworthy machine learning · 6%

Topics — the 7 heaviest of 8, each with the papers that count most for it

TopicWeightPapersLastEvidence papers
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control › dynamic stability
balance recovery
0.212013
Qualitative validation of humanoid robot models through balance recovery side-stepping experiments · ICRA 2013
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots
humanoid robot
0.212013
Qualitative validation of humanoid robot models through balance recovery side-stepping experiments · ICRA 2013
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots › legged robots › legged robot locomotion
bipedal locomotion
0.112012
Foot placement for planar bipeds with point feet · ICRA 2012
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control › robot control › gait control
foot placement
0.112012
Foot placement for planar bipeds with point feet · ICRA 2012
Robotics › Legged, aerial and field robots
legged robots
0.112012
Foot placement for planar bipeds with point feet · ICRA 2012
Machine learning › Trustworthy machine learning
model validation
0.012013
Qualitative validation of humanoid robot models through balance recovery side-stepping experiments · ICRA 2013
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control
robot dynamics
0.012013
Qualitative validation of humanoid robot models through balance recovery side-stepping experiments · ICRA 2013

Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics

linear inverted pendulum model · 0.23d multi-body model · 0.2simulation · 0.1conservation of energy · 0.1
YearPublicationVenuePosition
2013 Qualitative validation of humanoid robot models through balance recovery side-stepping experiments
abstract
Different models are used in literature to approximate the complex dynamics of a humanoid robot. Many models use strongly varying model assumptions that neglect the influence of feet, discontinuous ground impact, internal dynamics and coupling between the 3D coronal and sagittal plane dynamics. Often motivation is lacking why a certain model should be chosen or why certain dynamical aspects may or may not be neglected. A simple model like a linear inverted pendulum with low computational cost is frequently used on-line in foot placement algorithms, where model inaccuracy may lead to low control performance. A full 3D multi-body model with higher computational cost is typically used off-line in a simulator, where model inaccuracy may lead to unreliable results. This paper contributes experimental validation of both types of models by comparing them to the real dynamics of the humanoid robot TUlip during balance recovery side-stepping. Hereto, we evaluate the aforementioned most common model assumptions. The validated multi-body model that we implemented in the ROS Gazebo simulator is released on-line.
Tim Assman, Pieter van Zutven, Henk Nijmeijer
ICRA2
2012 Foot placement for planar bipeds with point feet
abstract
When humanoid robots are going to be used in society, they should be capable to maintain the balance. Knowing where to step appears to be crucially important to remain balanced. This paper contributes the foot placement indicator (FPI), an extension to the foot placement estimator (FPE) for planar bipeds with point feet and an arbitrary number of non-massless links. The method uses conservation of energy to determine where the planar biped needs to step to remain in balance. Simulations of the FPI show improved foot placement for balance with respect to the FPE.
Pieter van Zutven, Dragan Kostic, Henk Nijmeijer
ICRA1