Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Whole-body control, RL policies, VLA models, sim-to-real, ROS2, and the software stack that makes a humanoid actually walk and act.
chenperez
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2024 3:51 pm

Re: Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Post by chenperez »

@deborahperez One nitpick - OpenVLA is a notable open-source VLA model - roughly 7 billion parameters, trained on hundreds of thousands of real-world robot demonstrations - and has been shown to outperform much larger closed models on some manipulation benchmarks, which says a lot about how much of VLA performance comes from data curation rather than raw scale.
Building > buying.
williams84
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2024 8:50 am

Re: Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Post by williams84 »

That's the official framing, at least - reality tends to lag a bit. Sim-to-real transfer still commonly breaks on contact dynamics - friction, restitution, and deformable/compliant surfaces are the hardest things to model accurately in simulation, so policies trained purely in sim often need real-world fine-tuning specifically around contact-rich tasks.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
choi98
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2024 12:32 am

Re: Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Post by choi98 »

@williams84 Yeah, this tracks with what I've read as well. 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.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
chenperez
Posts: 202
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2024 3:51 pm

Re: Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Post by chenperez »

One nitpick - Whole-body control (WBC) formulates locomotion and manipulation as a single optimization problem across all joints simultaneously, respecting contact constraints and task priorities - it's more general than ZMP-only approaches but is computationally heavier and harder to tune.
Building > buying.
deborahperez
Posts: 279
Joined: Sat Aug 31, 2024 4:22 am

Re: Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Post by deborahperez »

Still learning the space, so correct me if wrong - OpenVLA is a notable open-source VLA model - roughly 7 billion parameters, trained on hundreds of thousands of real-world robot demonstrations - and has been shown to outperform much larger closed models on some manipulation benchmarks, which says a lot about how much of VLA performance comes from data curation rather than raw scale.
williams84
Posts: 237
Joined: Sat Sep 28, 2024 8:50 am

Re: Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Post by williams84 »

From hands-on experience, Diffusion policies model the distribution of possible actions and sample from it, which handles multimodal manipulation tasks (multiple valid ways to grasp something) more naturally than a single deterministic action output, at the cost of slower inference.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
camila.jackson0
Posts: 225
Joined: Wed Oct 09, 2024 1:27 am

Re: Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Post by camila.jackson0 »

@williams84 That's the official framing, at least - reality tends to lag a bit. 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. '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.
Building > buying.
choi98
Posts: 220
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2024 12:32 am

Re: Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Post by choi98 »

@camila.jackson0 Genuinely curious - OpenVLA is a notable open-source VLA model - roughly 7 billion parameters, trained on hundreds of thousands of real-world robot demonstrations - and has been shown to outperform much larger closed models on some manipulation benchmarks, which says a lot about how much of VLA performance comes from data curation rather than raw scale.
Watching this space closely since 2019.
dubois35
Posts: 280
Joined: Mon Sep 09, 2024 12:01 pm

Re: Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Post by dubois35 »

Yeah, this tracks with what I've read as well. Balance-recovery controllers are usually evaluated with push-recovery tests (a known, repeatable lateral push) in demos, but real-world robustness also depends on recovering from unstructured events like uneven flooring, unexpected contact, or a dropped payload shifting the center of mass mid-stride - which is a much harder, less demo-friendly test. '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.
they/them
erik_novi
Posts: 192
Joined: Sun Oct 13, 2024 6:23 am

Re: Whole-body control vs ZMP-based approaches - what's actually deployed today?

Post by erik_novi »

Can I ask a dumb follow-up - 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. Whole-body control (WBC) formulates locomotion and manipulation as a single optimization problem across all joints simultaneously, respecting contact constraints and task priorities - it's more general than ZMP-only approaches but is computationally heavier and harder to tune.
she/her
Post Reply