Track papers across labs, topics, and trends.
Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This paper analyzes robot morphology and control co-design landscapes for soft locomotion and manipulation, revealing three consistent patterns: low-dimensional quality manifolds, higher-quality regions with greater variation, and tight morphology-control coupling. The authors then leverage these observed inductive biases to create a co-design algorithm that infers and adapts to task-specific structure during the search process. The resulting algorithm achieves a 36% improvement and two orders of magnitude increase in sample efficiency compared to benchmark algorithms.
Co-design landscapes aren't as high-dimensional as you think: exploiting low-dimensional manifolds and morphology-control coupling unlocks orders-of-magnitude gains in sample efficiency.
Co-designing a robot's morphology and control can ensure synergistic interactions between them, prevalent in biological organisms. However, co-design is a high-dimensional search problem. To make this search tractable, we need a systematic method for identifying inductive biases tailored to its structure. In this paper, we analyze co-design landscapes for soft locomotion and manipulation tasks and identify three patterns that are consistent across regions of their co-design spaces. We observe that within regions of co-design space, quality varies along a low-dimensional manifold. Higher-quality regions exhibit variations spread across more dimensions, while tightly coupling morphology and control. We leverage these insights to devise an efficient co-design algorithm. Since the precise instantiation of this structure varies across tasks and is not known a priori, our algorithm infers it from information gathered during search and adapts to each task's specific structure. This yields $36\%$ more improvement than benchmark algorithms. Moreover, our algorithm achieved more than two orders of magnitude in sample efficiency compared to these benchmark algorithms, demonstrating the effectiveness of leveraging inductive biases to co-design.