Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Whole-body control, RL policies, VLA models, sim-to-real, ROS2, and the software stack that makes a humanoid actually walk and act.
emma_whit
Posts: 73
Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2025 11:20 pm

Re: Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Post by emma_whit »

@forgecam45 Minor factual note: 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.
diego.moore6
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu May 08, 2025 8:48 am

Re: Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Post by diego.moore6 »

@emma_whit Genuinely curious - '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.
jessica.karlsson
Posts: 11
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2026 8:07 am

Re: Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Post by jessica.karlsson »

@diego.moore6 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.
she/her | grad student, biped locomotion
olga_lind
Posts: 170
Joined: Tue Dec 24, 2024 12:11 pm

Re: Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Post by olga_lind »

@jessica.karlsson Here's the relevant bit as far as I understand it: 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.
wei_ross
Posts: 104
Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2025 2:40 am

Re: Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Post by wei_ross »

Tangent, but worth mentioning: Cross-embodiment training (training one policy across data from multiple different robot bodies) has shown some real transfer benefits for high-level behaviors, but low-level control (exact joint torques, timing) still tends to need embodiment-specific fine-tuning.
"The best actuator is the one that doesn't overheat."
freya.sokolov
Posts: 60
Joined: Sun Mar 08, 2026 12:23 pm

Re: Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Post by freya.sokolov »

@wei_ross +1 to this. Worth adding: 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. 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.
Ex-automotive, now full-time robots.
barbara50
Posts: 178
Joined: Thu Dec 19, 2024 12:19 pm

Re: Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Post by barbara50 »

Not sure I fully agree here. 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. 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.
Opinions my own, not my employer's.
chloe.harris7
Posts: 22
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2026 6:16 am

Re: Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Post by chloe.harris7 »

One nitpick - 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. 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.
rao91
Posts: 100
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2025 1:55 am

Re: Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Post by rao91 »

@chloe.harris7 I dealt with almost this exact situation. 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
tmartin
Posts: 30
Joined: Mon May 25, 2026 8:56 pm

Re: Anyone got good results combining classical footstep planning with a learned recovery policy?

Post by tmartin »

@rao91 This raises a question for me - 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.
he/him
Post Reply