About this Research Topic
Human-centered and human-like bipedal robots, including robotic exoskeletons, active prosthetic devices, and humanoid machines, have reached impressive performance levels in out-of-the-lab conditions and are rapidly approaching the market. To boost better solutions, a number of competition-based initiatives (such as RockIn, Robocup, Cybathlon, and the DARPA Robotic Challenge) have aimed to test and compare robotic implementations in real-life situations. Yet, we are still lacking a rigorous methodology to evaluate the different facets of bipedal locomotion performance on a common, reproducible, and quantitative basis. Such systematic benchmarking would allow researchers to measure, identify, and improve the critical issues of their machines in an efficient and objective fashion. This Frontiers Research Topic is looking for new metrics, protocols, devices, computational methods, and reference data for rating bipedal locomotion skills according to quantitative benchmarks.
This Research Topic calls for submissions that cover the following topics:
• Assessment of walking performance in presence of disturbances (e.g., pushes, rough terrains, unstable surfaces, slopes, soft ground)
• Assessment of balance performance in presence of disturbances (e.g., pushes, moving surfaces, loads)
• Assessment of physical and cognitive interaction between robot and user
• Model-based computational methods for assessing human and human-like locomotion
• Novel equipment for performing benchmark tests
• Effectiveness of wearable robots/prostheses on patients’ performance
• Performance and safety of industrial wearable robots
• Databases of human and robotic motion
• Competition approaches
Contributions should be applied on at least one of the following areas:
• Lower limb exoskeletons
• Lower limb prosthetic devices, both passive and/or powered
• Humanoid robots, in both simulated and/or real-life environments
• Human motion analysis (e.g., clinically oriented)
We strongly encourage authors to provide detailed description of the experimental protocols, to ensure their replicability across different platforms and measurement systems.
This Research Topic is recommended by the COST Action CA16116 “Wearable Robots for Augmentation, Assistance or Substitution of Human Motor Functions” http://www.cost.eu/COST_Actions/ca/CA16116
This Research Topic calls for submissions that cover the following topics:
• Assessment of walking performance in presence of disturbances (e.g., pushes, rough terrains, unstable surfaces, slopes, soft ground)
• Assessment of balance performance in presence of disturbances (e.g., pushes, moving surfaces, loads)
• Assessment of physical and cognitive interaction between robot and user
• Model-based computational methods for assessing human and human-like locomotion
• Novel equipment for performing benchmark tests
• Effectiveness of wearable robots/prostheses on patients’ performance
• Performance and safety of industrial wearable robots
• Databases of human and robotic motion
• Competition approaches
Contributions should be applied on at least one of the following areas:
• Lower limb exoskeletons
• Lower limb prosthetic devices, both passive and/or powered
• Humanoid robots, in both simulated and/or real-life environments
• Human motion analysis (e.g., clinically oriented)
We strongly encourage authors to provide detailed description of the experimental protocols, to ensure their replicability across different platforms and measurement systems.
This Research Topic is recommended by the COST Action CA16116 “Wearable Robots for Augmentation, Assistance or Substitution of Human Motor Functions” http://www.cost.eu/COST_Actions/ca/CA16116
Keywords: Wearable robots, Exoskeletons, Humanoids, Prostheses, Walking, Benchmarking, Performance, Human likeness, Human-robot interaction, Safety, Standards, Bipedal Robots, Posture
Important Note: All contributions to this Research Topic must be within the scope of the section and journal to which they are submitted, as defined in their mission statements. Frontiers reserves the right to guide an out-of-scope manuscript to a more suitable section or journal at any stage of peer review.
