Page 6 of 6

Re: What's the real-world accuracy of visual odometry on a walking humanoid?

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by amara.brown
Not to derail, but this reminds me of something adjacent: 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.

Re: What's the real-world accuracy of visual odometry on a walking humanoid?

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by kwameivanov
@amara.brown Same conclusion I've come to. Also worth noting: 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: What's the real-world accuracy of visual odometry on a walking humanoid?

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by jwang
Pretty much this. One thing to add: 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. 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: What's the real-world accuracy of visual odometry on a walking humanoid?

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by michaelroberts
@jwang Worth being a little skeptical of the marketing angle here. Estimating joint torque from motor current draw is cheap and requires no extra sensor, but it's less accurate than a dedicated torque sensor because it doesn't capture friction losses through the gearbox - good enough for coarse control, not always for precise force-controlled tasks.

Re: What's the real-world accuracy of visual odometry on a walking humanoid?

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by brenda52
@michaelroberts Follow-up question though - Multi-camera calibration drifts over time from thermal expansion, vibration, and mechanical wear, which is why production systems typically run periodic recalibration routines rather than assuming a one-time factory calibration holds forever. 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: What's the real-world accuracy of visual odometry on a walking humanoid?

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2026 11:59 am
by brian.campbell
Genuine beginner question - 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.