The material itself is worth a few stars. Clearly lots of work has gone into making some interesting interactive matlab demos. some of the quizzes are unnecessarily confusing.
the problem of mobility can not be well covered in short time, but this course gives a good introduction to problems applications and reference materials
автор: Andrew D•
Interesting class, but somewhat frustrating at times. I found the quizzes very conceptual, which was interesting, but trying to find the correct answer with no feedback as to how something was right or wrong made for a weaker learning experience. Had there been some feedback to understand why something is correct or not, I think that would enable more learning.
I also think more emphasis on Forward Kinematics and Inverse Kinematics would help ground this class as a more general class for students interested in robotics. Introduction to Jacobians and how we can calculate end effector forces with respect to joint torques would really help interlace this class with some of the other classes in this Robotics specialization. It seems like it sticks out the most.
Still. Interesting class and I learned some new stuff!
автор: Chandandeep S•
COuld have been better if it recommended some prerequisitives. It was a really challenging one especially it requiring background knowledge. Course could provide relevant background study references that are related to the questions asked rather than asking them to forage through the resources section and try to read everything. While it definitely gives a better understanding if one reads the resources. I read one or two papers and they helped me understand the material a little better. What I demand though is provision of relevant resources. Then I would give it 5 stars.
автор: Antonio C R G N S•
The course starts with a nice mathematical support. Midway it looses connection with mathematical details in a way that it becomes too vague and does not empower the student to really grasp the concepts. Some energy-based proofs and the few formulas presented are inserted a bit adhoc and not properly explained.
Despite not being to my liking in terms of depth, It is a good course as a general understanding of what has been accomplished in robotic legged-locomotion, what the state of the art is and where to find literature.
автор: Viktoras T•
I found it hard to understand some topics especially when instructors are just reading from the slides. I really wish there was a bit more time spent on explaining the intuition behind some of these concepts so that people completely new to the field could understand what is the meaning of it all. I found quizes even more disconnected from the material and either way too easy or requiring background knowledge. Overall, I enjoyed the material and was just disappointed with exercises and some of the instructors.
автор: Robert E•
Quizzes often have vague instructions and unclear connection to course material. Course content and lectures need editing and revision. For example. 2.1.3 lecture is to dense It has important information that should be spread out more, with other content removed. Lecture 3.2.3 has dubious connection to course. There is interesting material here, but more focus and organization would improve course.
The Course material and method of testing the understanding of the student needs to be improved. Despite the low quality of the quizzes, the course is very inspiring. The examples showed are very good and the lectures concentrated on teaching the underlying concept rather the Mathematics involved, which was refreshing.
автор: Leif K•
Nice high level overview of the motion of robots. I would have liked to do more programming (modeling of robots, controllers, etc.) in the course and have the lectures tie in closer with the content of the quizzes. The TAs were very active in the forums and helped clarify/fix any problems that came up.
автор: Jorge H O S•
The course is very interesting and full of valuable information, but the evaluations were made to fail. It requires a lot of additional research and the apparent intention of not passing the different quizzes becomes almost frustrating. It is full of tricky questions.
автор: NICHOLAS P•
Interesting topics covered, I think it may be possible to organize the material to give a better picture of the state of the art in legged mobility, and perhaps add more details on composing the controllers
автор: Iftach F•
many subjects are not clear enough.
it is better to put links and pictures than send us to look in lectures for a specific time frame.
and still it was very interesting and motivating course. thanks!
автор: Shaun L•
The course could give more worked out examples in lecture as opposed to just pure theory and leaving the examples for the students to figure out in the quizzes. A lot of students learn by example.
автор: Guillermo C•
The content is interesting, it does not go into details, but it was well delivered. The evaluation is ambiguous, way beyond the scope of the presented material, and it contains errors.
автор: Cristian D•
Very uneven. There are some good insights and ideas in there, but no way will a beginner be able to make sense of this. It's more like a sort of refresher/inspiration course.
автор: Piotr G•
Very interesting course, both tests and assignments are
demanding but fair.
Biggest problem of this course is that not all required topics are covered
enough in lectures.
автор: Julius S•
Good course. Stands well in the specialization. It was a bit buggy throughout tho. And the assignments could have focussed more on the control part.
автор: Barak R•
course started very very interesting and the first two weeks were great.
exercises were unclear and had a lot of errors making it very frustrating.
автор: Yiming Z•
It generally introduced mobility. But could have introduce more about the analytical model of these templates in this master level course.
автор: E. A P R•
I liked the course, it helped me understand leg robotics. Although I think the course has to improve the lectures of week 3 and the last.
автор: Aditya D•
Good teachers but a lot of questions in the quizzes were very ambiguous and unrelated to the Course Content.
автор: Keng-Hui W•
There must be something wrong to spend time on google&wiki much more than the course content.
автор: Jianwen L•
I spent more time on this course than the first and second courses, but I learned less.
автор: Fabio B•
Theme of the course is very interesting but teachers are not much didactic.
автор: ADITYA N•
A bit more detailed explanation on concepts is required
автор: Sanet G•
This course covers very interesting topics, but there are some serious shortcomings in the lectures. Too much information is just omitted or taken for granted. Some of the lecturers are rather inexperienced. Reading or reciting mathematical expressions in a monotonous voice without actually pointing to the visual representation of the lecture material makes it very difficult to follow. Better care should also be taken with the quizzes - if one looks at the comments or questions posted by some learners, it is clear that we simply don't understand the question, or a question is answered correctly in essence , but the quizz expected more (or less) precision without stating so . Finally for some reason the support from Technical Advisors was also lacking in the specific session that I did, contributing to my frustration and rather negative experience of what could be a very good course