How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?

IMUs, force/torque sensors, depth cameras, LiDAR, tactile skin, SLAM, and state estimation.
richard36
Posts: 96
Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2025 9:43 am

Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?

Post by richard36 »

This matches something I went through recently. Proprioception (the robot's sense of its own joint angles, velocities, and forces) tends to get less attention than flashy vision systems, even though a lot of balance and manipulation failures trace back to proprioceptive noise or miscalibration rather than a vision problem. IMU drift over time (bias instability) is usually the real culprit behind slowly diverging state estimates, not noise - it's typically handled with sensor fusion against other references (visual odometry, joint kinematics) rather than trying to eliminate drift at the source.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
ethan17
Posts: 138
Joined: Mon May 19, 2025 8:21 pm

Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?

Post by ethan17 »

This raises a question for me - Proprioception (the robot's sense of its own joint angles, velocities, and forces) tends to get less attention than flashy vision systems, even though a lot of balance and manipulation failures trace back to proprioceptive noise or miscalibration rather than a vision problem. A minimum viable sensing suite for safe bipedal walking generally includes joint encoders, an IMU for orientation/angular velocity, and either force/torque sensing or accurate current-based torque estimation at the ankles - everything else (vision, tactile, LiDAR) adds capability rather than being strictly required just to stay upright.
"Torque is a lifestyle."
park44
Posts: 156
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2024 12:03 am

Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?

Post by park44 »

Here's what I know on this: Depth sensing range and reliability both degrade outdoors in direct sunlight for most structured-light and active stereo cameras, since the ambient IR washes out the projected pattern - it's a real limitation for humanoids intended for anything beyond indoor, controlled environments. Sensor fusion mostly earns its keep by covering for each individual sensor's weaknesses - vision struggles with occlusion and lighting, IMUs drift, force/torque sensors are noisy at low loads - fusing them gives a more robust estimate than any one source alone, independent of raw compute.
she/her
george92
Posts: 108
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2025 4:18 pm

Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?

Post by george92 »

Appreciate the detailed answer. Event cameras (which report per-pixel brightness changes rather than full frames) are still more of a research curiosity than a production sensor for humanoids, mainly because the software ecosystem and processing pipelines around them are far less mature than for standard frame-based cameras. Depth sensing range and reliability both degrade outdoors in direct sunlight for most structured-light and active stereo cameras, since the ambient IR washes out the projected pattern - it's a real limitation for humanoids intended for anything beyond indoor, controlled environments.
she/her | grad student, biped locomotion
ivan22
Posts: 160
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2025 11:13 am

Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?

Post by ivan22 »

Just to be precise about one thing: Unitree's Dex3-1 dexterous hand packs around 33 pressure/tactile sensors per hand across the fingers and palm, capable of sensing pressure roughly in the 10g-2500g range - a useful reference point for what 'production tactile sensing' looks like right now. Vibration is one of the most underrated sources of noisy IMU and tactile readings - mounting matters as much as sensor quality, and a poorly isolated mount can add more noise than the sensor's own datasheet specs would suggest.
they/them
Post Reply