Page 4 of 6

Re: What's underrated: perception improvements or controller improvements, for overall reliability?

Posted: Sat Feb 21, 2026 3:24 am
by ssantos
@nancy_lewi Follow-up question though - 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. Kind of makes me think about how different this all looked even three years ago.

Re: What's underrated: perception improvements or controller improvements, for overall reliability?

Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2026 5:06 pm
by charlesbianchi
@ssantos Ran into exactly this myself. 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.

Re: What's underrated: perception improvements or controller improvements, for overall reliability?

Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2026 9:50 am
by deborah59
@charlesbianchi One nitpick - 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.

Re: What's underrated: perception improvements or controller improvements, for overall reliability?

Posted: Thu Mar 12, 2026 9:47 pm
by rossi30
@deborah59 Agreed, and I'd add: 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. '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.

Re: What's underrated: perception improvements or controller improvements, for overall reliability?

Posted: Tue Mar 17, 2026 6:53 pm
by kim37
Just to be precise about one thing: 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. 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.

Re: What's underrated: perception improvements or controller improvements, for overall reliability?

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2026 10:19 am
by diego.moore6
@kim37 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. Totally unrelated but has anyone else noticed how fast component costs are dropping this year.

Re: What's underrated: perception improvements or controller improvements, for overall reliability?

Posted: Wed Apr 01, 2026 5:01 pm
by lperez
@diego.moore6 Short answer: 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.

Re: What's underrated: perception improvements or controller improvements, for overall reliability?

Posted: Tue Apr 07, 2026 2:15 pm
by nancy_lewi
Related question - 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. 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.

Re: What's underrated: perception improvements or controller improvements, for overall reliability?

Posted: Wed Apr 15, 2026 1:53 pm
by nicole57
Slight correction, though the overall point stands: 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. Totally unrelated but has anyone else noticed how fast component costs are dropping this year.

Re: What's underrated: perception improvements or controller improvements, for overall reliability?

Posted: Sat Apr 18, 2026 6:33 pm
by gimbalmar65
I dealt with almost this exact situation. 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.