Benchmarking bipedal locomotion - A survey
Defining appropriate benchmarks of bipedal locomotion is a crucial step for moving to a next generation of humanoid and rehabilitation robots, as well as for generating more effective clinical metrics. Several European projects (H2R, BALANCE, Biomot, Koroibot, Walkman, among others) have started a joint action to involve the scientific community to identify the most relevant factors that should be included in the ideal benchmarking scheme for bipedal walking.

This questionnaire is a first step in this direction. Please dedicate 10 minutes to give us your opinion!

1. Indicate your main research area *
2. Would a benchmarking scheme for the assessment of locomotion performance be useful to you? *
3. What should the ideal benchmarking scheme be used for? *
IMPORTANT: The term "biped" below has a different meaning depending on the field. In humanoids: "robot". In wearable robots: "human+robot". In human walking: "person"
1 (not important)
2
3
4
5 (very important)
Measuring the performance of the biped
Comparing the biped with other bipeds
Improve the performance of the biped
4. What motor functions are you interested in evaluating? *
1 (not interested)
2
3
4
5 (very interested)
Standing
Gait
Stepping
Sit-to-stand
Running
5. What performance variables should the scheme measure? *
1 (not important)
2
3
4
5 (very important)
Postural stability
Speed
Energy effiency
Human-like kinematics (e.g. healthy CoM trajectory)
Human-like dynamics (e.g. exploiting passive dynamics)
Robustness under perturbations
Automatic adaptability to changing environment
Safe interaction with the environment
Endurance
Symmetry
6. What kinds of environmental conditions you consider relevant to explore? *
1 (not relevant)
2
3
4
5 (very relevant)
Unperturbed conditions (e.g. stationary walking, quiet standing)
Pushes
Inclined surfaces
Moving surfaces
Slippery surfaces
Rough terrain
Soft terrain
Obstacles
Added weights on the body
Voluntary changes in locomotion modes (e.g. standing to walking, speed change, direction change) 
Changes in sensory availability (vision, proprioception)
7. The ideal benchmarking scheme should: *
1 (not relevant)
2
3
4
5 (very relevant)
Be easy to use in laboratory settings
Be applicable to bipeds with different sizes
Include a detailed description of the experimental protocol
Give the possibility to store data
Return the performance scores on one single scale (e.g. from 1 to 10)
Automatically compare the performance with statistics of other bipeds already tested
Be anonymous
Be based on competition
Include a suggestion on the perturbation devices to be used
Include specification on the measurement systems to be used
Calculate the benchmarks automatically from raw data
Be possible to perform out of the lab
Be applicable by personnel without specific technical knowledge
8. To allow for others to contextualize the results, what information should be entered? *
asterisk (*) = not applicable to humans
1 (not relevant)
2
3
4
5 (very relevant)
Size
Weight
Degrees of freedom
Real/simulated
Cognitive abilities
Visual perception abilities
Type of actuation*
Photo of the system*
Control details*
Name of the system*
Anthropomorphic aspect*
9. Would you share with the community the data obtained on your system, to allow for comparison? *
10. Do you want to join the recently created mailing list "benchmarking bipedal locomotion"?
(if yes put your email address)
Your answer
11. Please, add any further inputs
e.g. additional questions or items you would have included, questions bad formulated, additional comments, etc...
Your answer
12. Your personal information (optional)
Your name, affiliation, email
Your answer
Submit
Never submit passwords through Google Forms.
This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google. Report Abuse - Terms of Service