Learning Structured Locomotion References for Optimization-Based Whole-Body Control
Authors: Ömer Tarık Banuş, Uluç Saranlı, M. Mert Ankaralı
Organizations: Center for Robotics and Artificial Intelligence (ROMER), Middle East Technical University (METU), 06800 Ankara, Türkiye. · Defense Systems Technologies Division, ASELSAN Inc., 06200 Ankara, Türkiye. · Department of Computer Engineering, METU, 06800 Ankara, Türkiye. · Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, METU, 06800 Ankara, Türkiye.
Quadruped locomotion requires coordinating body motion,contact forces, foothold placement, and gait timing. We present a hierarchical controller in which reinforcement learning adapts these structured locomotion references while a gait scheduler, reactive footstep planner, and whole-body impulse controller retain responsibility for high-frequency execution. The model-based backbone can sustain a nominal trot independently, allowing the policy to focus on when and how to modify an already functional locomotion controller. We train the complete hierarchy in a vectorized controller-in-the-loop environment using a six-direction disturbance curriculum. Under a common simulator and evaluation protocol, the proposed controller achieves 77.29% mean survival across the tested disturbance grid, compared with 50.35% for the model-based reference controller. Training-time channel ablations identify adaptive foothold placement as the largest marginal contributor to grid survival and reveal direction-dependent effects of gait-rate adaptation. Together, these results demonstrate the viability of the proposed hierarchical controller architecture for integrating learned adaptation with optimization-based whole-body control through structured locomotion references.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: Proposed controller. A 100 Hz policy supplies structured locomotion commands to a gait scheduler, footstep planner, and WBIC running at 500 Hz. Feedback provides the 54-dimensional observation.
Index
Command
Decoded range
0–1
body vx,vy residual
±0.5 m/s
2
yaw-rate residual
±0.3 rad/s
3–14
four forces (fx,fy,fz)
±50,±50,[0,250] N
15–22
four foothold offsets (x,y)
±0.5 m
23
body-height residual
±0.05 m
24
phase increment
[0,0.01] per tick
TABLE I: Action components; leg order is front-right (FR), front-left (FL), hind-right (HR), and hind-left (HL).
Signal
Dimension
Commanded forward velocity vxcmd
1
Body linear velocity vbb
3
Body angular velocity ωbb
3
Body orientation ϕb (roll, pitch, yaw)
3
Joint positions qj
12
Joint velocities q˙j
12
TABLE II: Observation components.
Term
Penalty pi
wi
Term
Penalty pi
wi
vx
3∣vxw−vxref∣
0.25
Straightness
5∣ybw∣+3∣vyw∣
0.15
vz
3∣vzw∣
0.10
Linear acceleration
∥abw∥22
0.025
Height
20∣zb−zref∣
0.35
Angular velocity
∥ωb∥22
0.025
Orientation
50(1−⟨qb,q0⟩)
0.15
Action variation
3∥at−at−1∥22
0.10
Phase progression
max(0,aθ+1)
0.05
Action magnitude
∑j∈Aat,j2
0.05
TABLE III: Reward penalties and weights. Each healthy-state component is wiexp(−pi) . Superscript w denotes the world frame, and q0 is the neutral-orientation quaternion.
Fig. 2: Go2 simulation environment. The arrow illustrates the disturbance direction; evaluation applies instantaneous velocity changes.
Fig. 3: Training episode length and timeout fraction for three seeds. Shading indicates disturbance ceilings of 1, 2, and 3 m/s, with transitions at 8.1 and 24.3 million transitions. Curves are unsmoothed.
Fig. 4: Survival under additive velocity disturbances, with 100 episodes per cell and policy. Curves and bands show the mean and ±1 sample standard deviation across three training seeds for the proposed and source-recipe-based joint-space controllers. MPC+WBIC is one fixed controller.
Controller
Grid survival (%)
MPC+WBIC
50.35
Source-recipe-based joint-space RL
54.01±5.55
Proposed
77.29±1.15
TABLE IV: Mean survival over the 60 disturbance conditions for the complete configured systems. Learned-controller results report mean ± sample SD across three training seeds; MPC+WBIC is one fixed controller.
Fig. 5: Training-time action-channel ablations: grid-survival change (left) and directional c50 change (right; negative is worse). Backward c50 uses extensions above 5.0 m/s excluded from the grid score.
Fig. 6: Nominal behavior of the retrained ablation arms over five undisturbed episodes. Small circles denote episodes, diamonds denote means, and crosses in the speed panel denote commanded-speed means.
Graduate School of Engineering, The University of Tokyo, Japan. · Department of Micro-Nano Mechanical Science and Engineering, Nagoya University, Nagoya, 464-8603, Japan. · Department of Mathematics and Informatics, Ecole Centrale de Lyon, France.