Page 2 of 3
Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?
Posted: Sat Sep 27, 2025 8:13 pm
by ssantos
Counterpoint:
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.
Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.
Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?
Posted: Tue Sep 30, 2025 4:05 pm
by nicole10
Same conclusion I've come to. Also worth noting:
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. 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.
Makes me wonder how this looks in another five years.
Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?
Posted: Thu Oct 02, 2025 6:18 am
by george92
@nicole10 This matches what I've seen too.
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. Tactile skin arrays have improved a lot, but 'good enough to matter' really depends on the task - coarse contact detection across a large area is fairly mature, while fine, high-resolution force distribution sensing (like a human fingertip) is still the harder problem.
Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?
Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2025 11:57 pm
by zoeanderson
@george92 This matches something I went through recently.
LiDAR gives reliable, lighting-independent range data but is heavier, pricier, and gives sparser point clouds up close than stereo or depth cameras, which is why a lot of humanoids lean on stereo/depth cameras for near-field manipulation and reserve LiDAR (if present at all) for longer-range navigation.
Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?
Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2025 7:57 am
by jwang
@zoeanderson To answer this directly:
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.
Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?
Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2025 8:35 pm
by deborahperez
@jwang I dealt with almost this exact situation.
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.
Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?
Posted: Mon Oct 20, 2025 7:28 am
by jhansen
@deborahperez I can speak to this a bit.
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. 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.
Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?
Posted: Wed Oct 22, 2025 7:54 pm
by jessica_faro
That's the official framing, at least - reality tends to lag a bit.
SLAM in a working warehouse is harder than in a controlled lab mainly because the map keeps changing - pallets move, people walk through, lighting shifts near dock doors - so a lot of production systems lean on semi-static maps refreshed periodically rather than pure continuous SLAM.
Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?
Posted: Sun Oct 26, 2025 4:53 am
by george92
@jessica_faro Slight correction, though the overall point stands:
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. 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.
Re: How do commercial humanoids handle sensor occlusion during self-motion?
Posted: Sat Nov 01, 2025 9:52 am
by green28
@george92 I'll believe the stronger version of that claim when it's independently verified.
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. Force/torque sensors near the ankle give a direct read on ground reaction forces, which is valuable for balance control, but they add cost, a failure point, and routing complexity right at a joint that already takes the most mechanical abuse.