What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
Re: What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
From hands-on experience,
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. 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.
Building > buying.
Re: What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
Appreciate the detailed answer.
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.
he/him | robotics hobbyist since the DARPA Grand Challenge days
Re: What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
Ran into exactly this myself.
ROS2 remains common in research and early-stage products for its tooling and ecosystem, but a number of production humanoid companies run custom, more tightly-optimized middleware for their real-time control loops, using ROS2-like tooling mainly for development, visualization, and non-real-time subsystems. 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.
Opinions my own, not my employer's.
Re: What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
@barbara50 That's the official framing, at least - reality tends to lag a bit.
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. 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.
-
zoeanderson
- Posts: 243
- Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2024 2:39 am
Re: What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
@dchen I see it a little differently.
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. 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.
-
jonathan.rao1
- Posts: 156
- Joined: Fri Dec 20, 2024 7:58 pm
Re: What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
@zoeanderson 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.
Currently: 3D printing my way to bankruptcy.
Re: What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
Here's the relevant bit as far as I understand it:
Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models like RT-2, OpenVLA, and Physical Intelligence's pi0 unify a vision-language backbone with an action-output head, letting a robot map a camera image and a text instruction directly to motor commands instead of hand-coding separate perception and planning stages.
she/her | grad student, biped locomotion
Re: What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
One nitpick -
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.
This whole thread is a good reminder how young this field still is.
they/them
Re: What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
@ivan22 One nitpick -
ROS2 remains common in research and early-stage products for its tooling and ecosystem, but a number of production humanoid companies run custom, more tightly-optimized middleware for their real-time control loops, using ROS2-like tooling mainly for development, visualization, and non-real-time subsystems. 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.
Opinions my own, not my employer's.
Re: What's the current bottleneck in loco-manipulation - the locomotion or the manipulation half?
@barbara50 Not to derail, but this reminds me of something adjacent:
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