2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) 2019
DOI: 10.1109/icra.2019.8793599
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Energy Efficient Navigation for Running Legged Robots

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
5
3

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 27 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Dynamic planning using a reduced robot model has recently shown promising results (Norby and Johnson, 2020) but has not been evaluated in deployment scenarios. Other work on navigation planning specifically for legged robots either only considers cases of obstacle avoidance on flat terrain (Zhao et al, 2018;Harper et al, 2019) or does additional contact planning, which pushes computational complexity past the real-time mark (Belter et al, 2019;Lin and Berenson, 2017;Reid et al, 2020). Approaches which learn traversability (Chavez-Garcia et al, 2017) or motion cost (Guzzi et al, 2020;Yang et al, 2021a) are powerful, but are either too slow due to the sequential querying of neural networks during sampling-based planning (Guzzi et al, 2020) or struggle in tight spaces where precise motion checking is necessary (Yang et al, 2021a).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dynamic planning using a reduced robot model has recently shown promising results (Norby and Johnson, 2020) but has not been evaluated in deployment scenarios. Other work on navigation planning specifically for legged robots either only considers cases of obstacle avoidance on flat terrain (Zhao et al, 2018;Harper et al, 2019) or does additional contact planning, which pushes computational complexity past the real-time mark (Belter et al, 2019;Lin and Berenson, 2017;Reid et al, 2020). Approaches which learn traversability (Chavez-Garcia et al, 2017) or motion cost (Guzzi et al, 2020;Yang et al, 2021a) are powerful, but are either too slow due to the sequential querying of neural networks during sampling-based planning (Guzzi et al, 2020) or struggle in tight spaces where precise motion checking is necessary (Yang et al, 2021a).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the reasons for this growing interest in MR teams is the limitation in capabilities of available single robots. Since no single robot can perform all conceivable tasks due to design [56,57], size [58] and power consumption limitations [59,60], it may be useful to combine the functionalities of several robots to accomplish a goal. The main reason for this is the need to accomplish tasks within a given timeframe where a diverse robotic fleet completing a collection of inspection tasks is more efficient and effective.…”
Section: Related Work: Mr Fleetsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Dynamic planning using a reduced robot model has recently shown promising results (Norby and Johnson, 2020), but it has not been evaluated in deployment scenarios. Other work on navigation planning specifically for legged robots either only considers cases of obstacle avoidance on flat terrain (Zhao et al, 2018;Harper et al, 2019), or it does additional contact planning, which pushes computational complexity past the real-time mark (Belter et al, 2019;Lin and Berenson, 2017;Reid et al, 2020). Approaches that learn traversability (Chavez-Garcia et al, 2017) or motion cost (Guzzi et al, 2020;Yang et al, 2021a) are powerful, but they are either too slow due to the sequential querying of neural networks during sampling-based planning (Guzzi et al, 2020), or they struggle in tight spaces where precise motion checking is necessary (Yang et al, 2021a).…”
Section: Related Workmentioning
confidence: 99%