Energetic Versus Sthenic Optimality Criteria for Gymnastic Movement Synthesis
Fabien Leboeuf (LMS), Guy Bessonnet (LMS), Pascal Seguin (LMS),, Patrick Lacouture (LMS)

TL;DR
This paper compares energetic and sthenic optimality criteria for synthesizing gymnastic movements, showing that energy-based criteria produce more realistic expert-like motions, while effort-based criteria yield simpler movements suitable for beginners.
Contribution
It clarifies the dynamic effects of energy versus effort criteria in movement synthesis and demonstrates their implications for coaching novice gymnasts.
Findings
Energy criterion produces movements similar to expert gymnasts.
Effort criterion results in simpler, more beginner-friendly movements.
Numerical simulations validate the theoretical differences.
Abstract
Dynamic synthesis of human movements raises the question of the selection of a suitable performance criterion able to generate proper dynamic behaviors. Two quite different criteria are likely to be appropriate candidates: the minimum effort cost (or sthenic criterion) and the minimum energy cost. The paper is aimed at clarifying the dynamic effects of these two fundamental criteria when considering movements executed with liveliness as they are in gymnastic. It is well known that the former cost generates movements with smooth dynamics. A special attention is devoted to the latter. The optimal control theory shows that minimizing the energy consumption results in actuating inputs of bang-off-bang type producing momentum impulses. When achieving dynamic synthesis, this criterion makes necessary to account for bounds set on driving torques. Moreover, when dealing with one-sided contacts,…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMotor Control and Adaptation · Balance, Gait, and Falls Prevention · Robotic Locomotion and Control
