Papers › Direct multiple shooting and direct collocation perform similarly in biomechanical...
Direct multiple shooting and direct collocation perform similarly in biomechanical predictive simulations
P. Puchaud, F. Bailly, M. Begon
The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.
Direct multiple shooting (DMS) and direct collocation (DC) are two common transcription methods for solving optimal control problems (OCP) in biomechanics and robotics. They have rarely been compared in terms of solution and speed. Through five examples of predictive simulations solved using five transcription methods and 100 initial guesses in the Bioptim software, we showed that not a single method outperformed systematically better. All methods converged to almost the same solution (cost, states, and controls) in all but one OCP, with several local minima being found in the latter. Nevertheless, DC based on fourth-order Legendre polynomials provided overall better results, especially in terms of dynamic consistency compared to DMS based on a fourth-order Runge-Kutta method. Furthermore, expressing the rigid-body constraints using inverse dynamics was usually faster than forward dynamics. DC with dynamics constraints based on inverse dynamics converged to better and less variable solutions. Consequently, we recommend starting with this transcription to solve OCPs but keep testing other methods.
Code
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
Not run by Syntology. Nothing on this page verifies that the listed code works.
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections