How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
-
servoken70
- Posts: 179
- Joined: Sun Nov 17, 2024 5:05 am
Re: How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
@charlesbianchi Tangent, but worth mentioning:
Zero Moment Point (ZMP) control keeps the robot's center of pressure within its support polygon and has been the classical backbone of bipedal walking for two decades - it's robust and well-understood, but tends to produce a somewhat conservative, flat-footed gait compared to more dynamic approaches.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
Re: How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
This matches something I went through recently.
Model predictive control (MPC) is still very much alive in production humanoids, often working alongside or underneath learned policies - MPC handles short-horizon dynamically-consistent trajectory optimization while learned components handle perception, task-level decisions, or recovery behaviors that are hard to hand-model. Isaac Lab (the successor to Isaac Gym) is widely used for large-scale parallel RL training thanks to GPU-accelerated physics, while MuJoCo is often used as a secondary 'sim-to-sim' validation step because its contact dynamics are generally considered more realistic than Isaac's, even though it trains slower at scale.
she/her | grad student, biped locomotion
-
forgecam45
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2026 11:24 pm
Re: How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
@nicole57 Just to be precise about one thing:
Physical Intelligence's pi0 pairs a smaller pretrained vision-language backbone with a separate flow-matching 'action expert' module, which is one way to get fast, high-frequency action output without needing the whole giant language model to run at control-loop speed.
he/him
Re: How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
@forgecam45 I'd push back on this a bit.
A lot of what reads as 'full autonomy' in public demos is closer to a mix of scripted state machines, teleoperation for the hardest sub-tasks, and autonomous execution for the easier, well-rehearsed parts - transparency about this mix varies a lot between companies. Domain randomization - varying friction, mass, sensor noise, and even visual textures during training - is one of the more reliable tricks for improving sim-to-real transfer, but overdoing it can make training slower to converge and produce overly conservative policies.
Kind of makes me think about how different this all looked even three years ago.
she/her | grad student, biped locomotion
Re: How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
@george92 Not to derail, but this reminds me of something adjacent:
Zero Moment Point (ZMP) control keeps the robot's center of pressure within its support polygon and has been the classical backbone of bipedal walking for two decades - it's robust and well-understood, but tends to produce a somewhat conservative, flat-footed gait compared to more dynamic approaches.
she/her
-
scott.andersson5
- Posts: 172
- Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2024 8:39 pm
Re: How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
One nitpick -
'Zero-shot sim-to-real' rarely means literally zero real-world tuning in practice - it usually means the policy transfers well enough to be usable with only calibration and minor safety-limit adjustments, rather than needing a full additional training phase on hardware.
-
thomasmitchell
- Posts: 49
- Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2026 6:08 am
Re: How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
@scott.andersson5 Slight correction, though the overall point stands:
'Zero-shot sim-to-real' rarely means literally zero real-world tuning in practice - it usually means the policy transfers well enough to be usable with only calibration and minor safety-limit adjustments, rather than needing a full additional training phase on hardware.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
Re: How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
From hands-on experience,
A lot of what reads as 'full autonomy' in public demos is closer to a mix of scripted state machines, teleoperation for the hardest sub-tasks, and autonomous execution for the easier, well-rehearsed parts - transparency about this mix varies a lot between companies.
they/them
Re: How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
@garcia51 This matches what I've seen too.
'Zero-shot sim-to-real' rarely means literally zero real-world tuning in practice - it usually means the policy transfers well enough to be usable with only calibration and minor safety-limit adjustments, rather than needing a full additional training phase on hardware.
Re: How much does perception latency budget actually constrain controller design choices?
This matches something I went through recently.
Physical Intelligence's pi0 pairs a smaller pretrained vision-language backbone with a separate flow-matching 'action expert' module, which is one way to get fast, high-frequency action output without needing the whole giant language model to run at control-loop speed.
This whole thread is a good reminder how young this field still is.