↓ Skip to main content

Switching Adaptability in Human-Inspired Sidesteps: A Minimal Model

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
2 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
15 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Switching Adaptability in Human-Inspired Sidesteps: A Minimal Model
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2017.00298
Pubmed ID
Authors

Keisuke Fujii, Yuki Yoshihara, Hiroko Tanabe, Yuji Yamamoto

Abstract

Humans can adapt to abruptly changing situations by coordinating redundant components, even in bipedality. Conventional adaptability has been reproduced by various computational approaches, such as optimal control, neural oscillator, and reinforcement learning; however, the adaptability in bipedal locomotion necessary for biological and social activities, such as unpredicted direction change in chase-and-escape, is unknown due to the dynamically unstable multi-link closed-loop system. Here we propose a switching adaptation model for performing bipedal locomotion by improving autonomous distributed control, where autonomous actuators interact without central control and switch the roles for propulsion, balancing, and leg swing. Our switching mobility model achieved direction change at any time using only three actuators, although it showed higher motor costs than comparable models without direction change. Our method of evaluating such adaptation at any time should be utilized as a prerequisite for understanding universal motor control. The proposed algorithm may simply explain and predict the adaptation mechanism in human bipedality to coordinate the actuator functions within and between limbs.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 15 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 15 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 4 27%
Researcher 2 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 13%
Professor 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Other 1 7%
Unknown 4 27%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Business, Management and Accounting 2 13%
Sports and Recreations 2 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 7%
Psychology 1 7%
Computer Science 1 7%
Other 2 13%
Unknown 6 40%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 June 2017.
All research outputs
#15,459,782
of 22,973,051 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,281
of 7,181 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#199,198
of 317,326 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#146
of 178 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,973,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,181 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 317,326 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 178 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.