pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.19840 · v1 · pith:D4PHBVANnew · submitted 2026-05-19 · 💻 cs.RO

Justifying bio-inspired robotics research: A taxonomy of strategies

Margaret J. Zhang , Justin Ting , Talia Y. Moore This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 05:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO
keywords bio-inspired roboticstaxonomydesign motivationsresearch justificationperformance evaluationbiological inspirationrobotics strategies
0
0 comments X p. Extension
pith:D4PHBVAN Add to your LaTeX paper What is a Pith Number? 
\usepackage{pith}
\pithnumber{D4PHBVAN}

Prints a linked pith:D4PHBVAN badge after your title and writes the identifier into PDF metadata. Compiles on arXiv with no extra files. Learn more

The pith

A taxonomy classifies motivations for bio-inspired robotics and links each to likely contributions.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

Bio-inspired robotics often lacks a consistent way to choose and justify how natural features are copied into machines. The paper introduces a taxonomy that sorts different motivations for this kind of design and spells out what kinds of advances each motivation tends to produce. A sympathetic reader would care because clearer categories should make it easier for researchers to explain why their project uses biology and for reviewers or funders to judge whether the choice fits the goal. If the taxonomy holds, mismatched expectations between what a design promises and what it delivers should decrease.

Core claim

The lack of a systematic approach to bio-inspired design has resulted in inconsistencies in motivations and methods that make it difficult to predict or evaluate the success of bio-inspired design. To address this, the authors propose a taxonomy of motivations for bio-inspired design and describe the potential significant contributions that are likely to result from different approaches. This taxonomy assists robotics researchers in justifying their specific bio-inspired approach and helps funding program managers discern the value of different bio-inspired approaches.

What carries the argument

The taxonomy of motivations for bio-inspired design, which groups approaches by their intended goals and the types of robotic contributions they can produce.

If this is right

  • Researchers gain a structured way to state why they selected a particular biological feature and what result they expect.
  • Funding managers can compare proposals by the contribution type each motivation is expected to deliver.
  • Evaluation criteria become more uniform because success can be judged against the stated motivation category.
  • Disappointment from designs judged superficial decreases when expectations are matched to the chosen strategy in advance.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same taxonomy structure could be tested in adjacent fields such as bio-inspired materials or prosthetics to check whether the motivation categories transfer.
  • Retrospective classification of past robotics papers might reveal which motivation types have historically produced the most durable technical advances.
  • Journals could adopt the taxonomy as an optional reporting checklist to make bio-inspired claims easier to assess during review.
  • The framework invites a follow-up study that measures whether papers explicitly using the taxonomy receive more consistent reviewer scores on justification.

Load-bearing premise

That inconsistent motivations and methods are the main reason it is currently hard to predict or evaluate success in bio-inspired robotics projects.

What would settle it

A collection of published bio-inspired robotics papers classified with the taxonomy that shows no clearer link between chosen motivation and actual outcomes than before the taxonomy existed.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.19840 by Justin Ting, Margaret J. Zhang, Talia Y. Moore.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Conceptual diagram showing examples of many different types of bio-inspired design, all [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Diagram showing the spatial relationships among the taxonomical categories arranged by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

For most of human history, we have not thought systematically about how and why we incorporate aspects of the natural world into our designs. The lack of a systematic approach has resulted in inconsistencies in motivations and methods that make it difficult to predict or evaluate the success of bio-inspired design. This mismatch between expectations and results can lead to disappointment when a reader considers a bio-inspired design to be superficial, weak, or incomplete. This is especially true in the field of Robotics, in which similarity to a biological system might be the driving motivation for construction. In an effort to assist robotics researchers justify their specific bio-inspired approach and to assist funding program managers with discerning the value of different bio-inspired approaches, here we propose a taxonomy of motivations for bio-inspired design and describe the potential significant contributions that are likely to result from different approaches.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the lack of a systematic approach to bio-inspired design has resulted in inconsistencies in motivations and methods that make it difficult to predict or evaluate success, particularly in robotics where similarity to biological systems may drive construction. To address this, the authors propose a taxonomy of motivations for bio-inspired design and describe the potential significant contributions likely to result from different approaches, with the aim of assisting researchers in justifying their specific bio-inspired approaches and helping funding program managers discern the value of different approaches.

Significance. If the taxonomy is clear and usable, it offers a conceptual framework that could help standardize justifications for bio-inspired robotics research and improve alignment between expectations and results. The paper's forward-looking classification scheme, grounded in observed problems in the field rather than fitted parameters or self-referential derivations, represents a strength as an explicitly conceptual contribution.

minor comments (2)
  1. The manuscript would be strengthened by including one or two concrete examples applying the taxonomy to published bio-inspired robotics work, to demonstrate how it clarifies motivations and expected contributions.
  2. A summary table listing the taxonomy categories alongside their described potential contributions would improve readability and allow quick reference for researchers and reviewers.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive review and recommendation for minor revision. We appreciate the recognition that our taxonomy offers a conceptual framework grounded in observed problems in the field.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: If the taxonomy is clear and usable, it offers a conceptual framework that could help standardize justifications for bio-inspired robotics research and improve alignment between expectations and results. The paper's forward-looking classification scheme, grounded in observed problems in the field rather than fitted parameters or self-referential derivations, represents a strength as an explicitly conceptual contribution.

    Authors: We are encouraged by this assessment. Our taxonomy is explicitly designed as a forward-looking tool derived from real inconsistencies in motivations and methods, rather than from fitted data or circular reasoning, to help researchers justify approaches and assist funding managers in evaluating them. revision: no

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: taxonomy proposal is a self-contained conceptual classification

full rationale

The paper advances a forward-looking taxonomy of motivations for bio-inspired robotics design along with descriptions of likely contributions from each approach. This is an explicitly conceptual contribution satisfied by the act of presenting the taxonomy and associated descriptions. No equations, fitted parameters, predictions, or derivations are present that could reduce to inputs by construction. The abstract grounds the motivation in observed field inconsistencies without invoking self-citations or uniqueness theorems. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks and receives a non-circularity finding.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that inconsistencies in bio-inspired robotics stem primarily from lack of systematic motivation frameworks, and that a taxonomy can directly address prediction and evaluation difficulties.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Bio-inspired robotics research suffers from inconsistencies in motivations and methods due to the absence of a systematic approach.
    Directly stated in the abstract as the core problem the taxonomy is meant to solve.
invented entities (1)
  • Taxonomy of motivations for bio-inspired design no independent evidence
    purpose: To assist robotics researchers in justifying their approaches and to help funding managers evaluate different strategies.
    The taxonomy is the primary new construct introduced by the paper.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5666 in / 1155 out tokens · 32717 ms · 2026-05-20T05:19:41.968985+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

117 extracted references · 117 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The Philosophy of Biomimicry,

    H. Dicks, “The Philosophy of Biomimicry,”Philosophy & Technology, vol. 29, no. 3, pp. 223– 243, 2016

    work page 2016

  2. [2]

    ˇCapek,R.U.R

    K. ˇCapek,R.U.R. (Rossum’s Universal Robots). Aventinum, 1920

    work page 1920

  3. [3]

    Habib, ed.,Bioinspiration and Robotics: Walking and Climbing Robots

    M. Habib, ed.,Bioinspiration and Robotics: Walking and Climbing Robots. IntechOpen, 2007

    work page 2007

  4. [4]

    The neuromechanics of animal locomotion: From biology to robotics and back,

    P. Ramdya and A. J. Ijspeert, “The neuromechanics of animal locomotion: From biology to robotics and back,”Science Robotics, vol. 8, no. 78, p. eadg0279, 2023

    work page 2023

  5. [5]

    Biologically Inspired Robotics,

    F. Iida and A. J. Ijspeert, “Biologically Inspired Robotics,” inSpringer Handbook of Robotics (B. Siciliano and O. Khatib, eds.), pp. 2015–2034, Springer International Publishing, 2016. 12

    work page 2015

  6. [6]

    Perception and role of standards in the world of biomimetics,

    K. Wanieck and H. Beismann, “Perception and role of standards in the world of biomimetics,” Bioinspired, Biomimetic and Nanobiomaterials, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 8–15, 2021

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    Biomimicry: Exploring Research, Challenges, Gaps, and Tools,

    S. Sharma and P. Sarkar, “Biomimicry: Exploring Research, Challenges, Gaps, and Tools,” in Research into Design for a Connected World(A. Chakrabarti, ed.), pp. 87–97, Springer, 2019

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    A principled approach to bio-inspired design of legged locomotion systems,

    D. E. Koditschek, R. J. Full, and M. Buehler, “A principled approach to bio-inspired design of legged locomotion systems,” inUnmanned Ground Vehicle Technology VI, vol. 5422, pp. 86– 100, SPIE, 2004

    work page 2004

  9. [9]

    Bio-Inspired Design: An Overview Investigating Open Questions From the Broader Field of Design-by-Analogy,

    K. Fu, D. Moreno, M. Yang, and K. L. Wood, “Bio-Inspired Design: An Overview Investigating Open Questions From the Broader Field of Design-by-Analogy,”Journal of Mechanical Design, vol. 136, no. 111102, 2014

    work page 2014

  10. [10]

    How bio-inspired is your design? A transparent reporting framework,

    C. Harvey, “How bio-inspired is your design? A transparent reporting framework,”Commu- nications Engineering, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 70, 2026

    work page 2026

  11. [11]

    Addressing Diverse Motivations to Enable Bioinspired Design,

    W. C. Barley, L. Ruge-Jones, A. Wissa, A. V. Suarez, and M. Alleyne, “Addressing Diverse Motivations to Enable Bioinspired Design,”Integrative and Comparative Biology, vol. 62, no. 5, 2022

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Spirobs: Logarithmic spiral-shaped robots for versatile grasping across scales,

    Z. Wang, N. M. Freris, and X. Wei, “Spirobs: Logarithmic spiral-shaped robots for versatile grasping across scales,”Device, vol. 3, no. 4, 2025

    work page 2025

  13. [13]

    Biomimetic chameleon soft robot with artificial crypsis and disruptive coloration skin,

    H. Kim, J. Choi, K. K. Kim, P. Won, S. Hong, and S. H. Ko, “Biomimetic chameleon soft robot with artificial crypsis and disruptive coloration skin,”Nature communications, vol. 12, no. 1, p. 4658, 2021

    work page 2021

  14. [14]

    The” artificial muscle

    M. Agerholm and A. Lord, “The” artificial muscle” of mckibben,”The Lancet, vol. 277, no. 7178, pp. 660–661, 1961

    work page 1961

  15. [15]

    Compliant suction gripper with seamless deployment and retraction for robust picking against depth and tilt errors,

    Y. Yoo, J. Eom, M. Park, and K.-J. Cho, “Compliant suction gripper with seamless deployment and retraction for robust picking against depth and tilt errors,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 1311–1318, 2023

    work page 2023

  16. [16]

    Dynamics, “Spot.”

    B. Dynamics, “Spot.”

    work page

  17. [17]

    ANY- mal - a highly mobile and dynamic quadrupedal robot,

    M. Hutter, C. Gehring, D. Jud, A. Lauber, C. D. Bellicoso, V. Tsounis, J. Hwangbo, K. Bodie, P. Fankhauser, M. Bloesch, R. Diethelm, S. Bachmann, A. Melzer, and M. Hoepflinger, “ANY- mal - a highly mobile and dynamic quadrupedal robot,” in2016 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 38–44, 2016

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    Robotic vertical jumping agility via series-elastic power modulation,

    D. W. Haldane, M. M. Plecnik, J. K. Yim, and R. S. Fearing, “Robotic vertical jumping agility via series-elastic power modulation,”Science Robotics, vol. 1, no. 1, p. eaag2048, 2016

    work page 2016

  19. [19]

    Event-Based Vision: A Survey ,

    G. Gallego, T. Delbruck, G. Orchard, C. Bartolozzi, B. Taba, A. Censi, S. Leutenegger, A. J. Davison, J. Conradt, K. Daniilidis, and D. Scaramuzza, “ Event-Based Vision: A Survey ,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis & Machine Intelligence, vol. 44, no. 01, pp. 154–180, 2022

    work page 2022

  20. [20]

    Cockroaches traverse crevices, crawl rapidly in confined spaces, and inspire a soft, legged robot,

    K. Jayaram and R. J. Full, “Cockroaches traverse crevices, crawl rapidly in confined spaces, and inspire a soft, legged robot,”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 113, no. 8, pp. E950–E957, 2016. 13

    work page 2016

  21. [21]

    RHex: A simple and highly mobile hexapod robot,

    U. Saranli, M. Buehler, and D. E. Koditschek, “RHex: A simple and highly mobile hexapod robot,”The International Journal of Robotics Research, vol. 20, no. 7, pp. 616–631, 2001

    work page 2001

  22. [22]

    Sensitive dependence of the motion of a legged robot on granular media,

    C. Li, P. B. Umbanhowar, H. Komsuoglu, D. E. Koditschek, and D. I. Goldman, “Sensitive dependence of the motion of a legged robot on granular media,”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 106, no. 24, pp. 3029–3034, 2009

    work page 2009

  23. [23]

    Bioinspired self-repairing slippery surfaces with pressure-stable omniphobicity,

    T.-S. Wong, S. H. Kang, S. K. Tang, E. J. Smythe, B. D. Hatton, A. Grinthal, and J. Aizen- berg, “Bioinspired self-repairing slippery surfaces with pressure-stable omniphobicity,”Nature, vol. 477, no. 7365, pp. 443–447, 2011

    work page 2011

  24. [24]

    Tail- assisted pitch control in lizards, robots and dinosaurs,

    T. Libby, T. Y. Moore, E. Chang-Siu, D. Li, D. J. Cohen, A. Jusufi, and R. J. Full, “Tail- assisted pitch control in lizards, robots and dinosaurs,”Nature, vol. 481, pp. 181–184, jan 2012

    work page 2012

  25. [25]

    From swimming to walking with a salamander robot driven by a spinal cord model,

    A. J. Ijspeert, A. Crespi, D. Ryczko, and J.-M. Cabelguen, “From swimming to walking with a salamander robot driven by a spinal cord model,”science, vol. 315, no. 5817, pp. 1416–1420, 2007

    work page 2007

  26. [26]

    Tunabot Flex: a tuna-inspired robot with body flexibility improves high-performance swimming,

    C. H. White, G. V. Lauder, and H. Bart-Smith, “Tunabot Flex: a tuna-inspired robot with body flexibility improves high-performance swimming,”Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, vol. 16, no. 2, p. 026019, 2021

    work page 2021

  27. [27]

    Climbing walls with microspines,

    A. T. Asbeck, S. Kim, A. McClung, A. Parness, and M. R. Cutkosky, “Climbing walls with microspines,” inIEEE ICRA, pp. 4315–4317, Fla., 2006

    work page 2006

  28. [28]

    Smooth vertical surface climbing with directional adhesion,

    S. Kim, M. Spenko, S. Trujillo, B. Heyneman, D. Santos, and M. R. Cutkosky, “Smooth vertical surface climbing with directional adhesion,”IEEE Transactions on robotics, vol. 24, no. 1, pp. 65–74, 2008

    work page 2008

  29. [29]

    Autonomous actuation of flapping wing robots inspired by asynchronous insect muscle,

    J. Lynch, J. Gau, S. Sponberg, and N. Gravish, “Autonomous actuation of flapping wing robots inspired by asynchronous insect muscle,” in2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 2076–2083, IEEE, 2022

    work page 2076

  30. [30]

    Grip and grasp: lizard claw inspired robotic manipulators,

    H. Lee, K. Douglas, A. Bray, A. Rummel, and P. Alam, “Grip and grasp: lizard claw inspired robotic manipulators,”Advanced Robotics Research, p. e202500183, 2025

    work page 2025

  31. [31]

    A biomimetic robotic platform to study flight specializations of bats,

    A. Ramezani, S.-J. Chung, and S. Hutchinson, “A biomimetic robotic platform to study flight specializations of bats,”Science Robotics, vol. 2, no. 3, p. eaal2505, 2017

    work page 2017

  32. [32]

    Reverse-engineering the locomotion of a stem amniote,

    J. A. Nyakatura, K. Melo, T. Horvat, K. Karakasiliotis, V. R. Allen, A. Andikfar, E. Andrada, P. Arnold, J. Laustr¨ oer, J. R. Hutchinson,et al., “Reverse-engineering the locomotion of a stem amniote,”Nature, vol. 565, no. 7739, pp. 351–355, 2019

    work page 2019

  33. [33]

    The anthroform biorobotic arm: a system for the study of spinal circuits,

    B. Hannaford, J. M. Winters, C.-P. Chou, and P.-H. Marbot, “The anthroform biorobotic arm: a system for the study of spinal circuits,”Annals of biomedical engineering, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 399–408, 1995

    work page 1995

  34. [34]

    Giraffe Neck Robot: First Step Toward a Powerful and Flexible Robot Prototyping Based on Giraffe Anatomy,

    A. Niikura, H. Nabae, G. Endo, M. Gunji, K. Mori, R. Niiyama, and K. Suzumori, “Giraffe Neck Robot: First Step Toward a Powerful and Flexible Robot Prototyping Based on Giraffe Anatomy,”IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 3539–3546, 2022. 14

    work page 2022

  35. [35]

    Emulating duration and curvature of coral snake anti-predator thrashing behaviors using a soft-robotic platform,

    S. M. Danforth, M. Kohler, D. Bruder, A. R. D. Rabosky, S. Kota, R. Vasudevan, and T. Y. Moore, “Emulating duration and curvature of coral snake anti-predator thrashing behaviors using a soft-robotic platform,” in2020 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Au- tomation (ICRA), pp. 5068–5074, IEEE, 2020

    work page 2020

  36. [36]

    T. G. Chen, B. C. Goolsby, G. Bernal, L. A. O’Connell, and M. R. Cutkosky,Feed Me: Robotic Infiltration of Poison Frog Families, pp. 293–302. Springer Nature Switzerland, 2023

    work page 2023

  37. [37]

    Recent biological invasion shapes species recognition and aggressive behaviour in a native species: A behavioural experiment using robots in the field,

    C. M. S. Dufour, D. L. Clark, A. Herrel, and J. B. Losos, “Recent biological invasion shapes species recognition and aggressive behaviour in a native species: A behavioural experiment using robots in the field,”Journal of Animal Ecology, vol. 89, no. 7, pp. 1604–1614, 2020

    work page 2020

  38. [38]

    Biomimetic strategies in kinetic architecture: A comparative analysis of nature-inspired roof and fa¸ cade designs,

    F. Razoki and D. Al-Kazzaz, “Biomimetic strategies in kinetic architecture: A comparative analysis of nature-inspired roof and fa¸ cade designs,”International Journal of Design and Nature and Ecodynamics, vol. 20, pp. 1269–1282, 2025

    work page 2025

  39. [39]

    Biomimetic design and development of an oryctodromeus-inspired robotic dinosaur skeleton,

    K. Bingham, A. Hafezi, A. Thapa, S. Sourani Yancheshmeh, C. Zakrevski, M. Berry, S. Das, P. Walker, J. Cortez Lopez, D. Thompson,et al., “Biomimetic design and development of an oryctodromeus-inspired robotic dinosaur skeleton,” inASME International Mechanical Engi- neering Congress and Exposition, vol. 88636, p. V005T07A028, American Society of Mechanica...

    work page 2024

  40. [40]

    Design and characterisation of a tendon-driven artificial pelvic floor muscle,

    Y. Zekaria, A. Tzemanaki, and J. Rossiter, “Design and characterisation of a tendon-driven artificial pelvic floor muscle,” inIEEE RoboSoft, 2026

    work page 2026

  41. [41]

    Design and characteriza- tion of an open-source robotic leg prosthesis,

    A. F. Azocar, L. M. Mooney, L. J. Hargrove, and E. J. Rouse, “Design and characteriza- tion of an open-source robotic leg prosthesis,” in2018 7th IEEE International Conference on Biomedical Robotics and Biomechatronics (Biorob), pp. 111–118, IEEE, 2018

    work page 2018

  42. [42]

    Aesthetic of prosthetic devices: from medical equipment to a work of design,

    S. Sansoni, L. Speer, A. Wodehouse, and A. Buis, “Aesthetic of prosthetic devices: from medical equipment to a work of design,” inEmotional Engineering Volume 4, pp. 73–92, Springer, 2016

    work page 2016

  43. [43]

    A sensorized blackberry proxy for learning soft fruit harvesting,

    C. VanAtter, S. Balaji, , and J. R. Davidson, “A sensorized blackberry proxy for learning soft fruit harvesting,” inIEEE RoboSoft, 2026

    work page 2026

  44. [44]

    Robotics-inspired biology,

    N. Gravish and G. V. Lauder, “Robotics-inspired biology,”Journal of Experimental Biology, vol. 221, no. 7, 2018

    work page 2018

  45. [45]

    Robotics as a Comparative Method in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology,

    G. V. Lauder, “Robotics as a Comparative Method in Ecology and Evolutionary Biology,” Integrative and Comparative Biology, vol. 62, no. 3, pp. 721–734, 2022

    work page 2022

  46. [46]

    Webb and T

    B. Webb and T. Consilvio,Biorobotics. MIT Press, 2001-07

    work page 2001

  47. [47]

    Testing Biological Hypotheses with Embodied Robots: Adaptations, Accidents, and By-Products in the Evolution of Vertebrates,

    S. F. Roberts, J. Hirokawa, H. G. Rosenblum, H. Sakhtah, A. A. Gutierrez, M. E. Porter, and J. H. Long, “Testing Biological Hypotheses with Embodied Robots: Adaptations, Accidents, and By-Products in the Evolution of Vertebrates,”Frontiers in Robotics and AI, vol. 1, 2014

    work page 2014

  48. [48]

    Bioinspired Design in Research: Evolution as Beta-Testing,

    B. E. Flammang, “Bioinspired Design in Research: Evolution as Beta-Testing,”Integrative and Comparative Biology, vol. 62, no. 5, pp. 1164–1173, 2022

    work page 2022

  49. [49]

    The Dynamics of Legged Lo- comotion: Models, Analyses, and Challenges,

    P. Holmes, R. J. Full, D. Koditschek, and J. Guckenheimer, “The Dynamics of Legged Lo- comotion: Models, Analyses, and Challenges,”SIAM Review, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 207–304, 2006. 15

    work page 2006

  50. [50]

    Tactical allocation of effort among multiple signals in sage grouse: an experiment with a robotic female,

    G. L. Patricelli and A. H. Krakauer, “Tactical allocation of effort among multiple signals in sage grouse: an experiment with a robotic female,”Behavioral Ecology, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 97–106, 2010

    work page 2010

  51. [51]

    A physical model of mantis shrimp for exploring the dynamics of ultrafast systems,

    E. Steinhardt, N.-s. P. Hyun, J.-s. Koh, G. Freeburn, M. H. Rosen, F. Z. Temel, S. Patek, and R. J. Wood, “A physical model of mantis shrimp for exploring the dynamics of ultrafast systems,”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 118, no. 33, p. e2026833118, 2021

    work page 2021

  52. [52]

    Bite-bot: A robotic platform for studying envenomation,

    J. Cieply and T. Y. Moore, “Bite-bot: A robotic platform for studying envenomation,”Inte- grative and Comparative Biology, 2026. In revision

    work page 2026

  53. [53]

    Launching engineered prototypes to better understand the factors that influence click beetle jump capacity,

    L. Zhang, T. Mathur, A. Wissa, and M. Alleyne, “Launching engineered prototypes to better understand the factors that influence click beetle jump capacity,” in2023 IEEE Conference on Control Technology and Applications (CCTA), pp. 681–686, IEEE, 2023

    work page 2023

  54. [54]

    Luminance-dependent visual processing enables moth flight in low light,

    S. Sponberg, J. P. Dyhr, R. W. Hall, and T. L. Daniel, “Luminance-dependent visual processing enables moth flight in low light,”Science, vol. 348, no. 6240, pp. 1245–1248, 2015

    work page 2015

  55. [55]

    Is biorobotics science? Some theoretical reflections,

    M. Tamborini and E. Datteri, “Is biorobotics science? Some theoretical reflections,”Bioinspi- ration & Biomimetics, vol. 18, no. 1, p. 015005, 2022

    work page 2022

  56. [56]

    Using a biologi- cally mimicking climbing robot to explore the performance landscape of climbing in lizards,

    J. T. Schultz, H. K. Beck, T. Haagensen, T. Proost, and C. J. Clemente, “Using a biologi- cally mimicking climbing robot to explore the performance landscape of climbing in lizards,” Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, vol. 288, no. 1947, p. 20202576, 2021

    work page 1947

  57. [57]

    Biomimicking interfacial fracture behavior of lizard tail autotomy with soft microinterlocking structures,

    N. S. Baban, A. Orozaliev, C. J. Stubbs, and Y.-A. Song, “Biomimicking interfacial fracture behavior of lizard tail autotomy with soft microinterlocking structures,”Bioinspiration & Biomimetics, vol. 17, no. 3, p. 036002, 2022

    work page 2022

  58. [58]

    Reverse engineering the control law for schooling in zebrafish using virtual reality,

    L. Li, M. Nagy, G. Amichay, R. Wu, W. Wang, O. Deussen, D. Rus, and I. D. Couzin, “Reverse engineering the control law for schooling in zebrafish using virtual reality,”Science Robotics, vol. 10, no. 101, p. eadq6784, 2025

    work page 2025

  59. [59]

    Biofabrication of Living Actuators,

    R. Raman, “Biofabrication of Living Actuators,”Annual Review of Biomedical Engineering, vol. 26, pp. 223–245, 2024

    work page 2024

  60. [60]

    Why animals can outrun robots,

    S. A. Burden, T. Libby, K. Jayaram, S. Sponberg, and J. M. Donelan, “Why animals can outrun robots,”Science Robotics, vol. 9, no. 89, p. eadi9754, 2024

    work page 2024

  61. [61]

    A cyborg beetle: Insect flight control through an implantable, tetherless microsystem,

    H. Sato, C. W. Berry, B. E. Casey, G. Lavella, Y. Yao, J. M. VandenBrooks, and M. M. Mahar- biz, “A cyborg beetle: Insect flight control through an implantable, tetherless microsystem,” in 2008 IEEE 21st International Conference on Micro Electro Mechanical Systems, pp. 164–167, 2008

    work page 2008

  62. [62]

    Three-dimensionally printed biological machines pow- ered by skeletal muscle,

    C. Cvetkovic, R. Raman, V. Chan, B. J. Williams, M. Tolish, P. Bajaj, M. S. Sakar, H. H. Asada, M. T. A. Saif, and R. Bashir, “Three-dimensionally printed biological machines pow- ered by skeletal muscle,”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 111, no. 28, pp. 10125–10130, 2014

    work page 2014

  63. [63]

    A modular approach to the design, fabrication, and characterization of muscle-powered biological machines,

    R. Raman, C. Cvetkovic, and R. Bashir, “A modular approach to the design, fabrication, and characterization of muscle-powered biological machines,”Nature Protocols, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 519–533, 2017. 16

    work page 2017

  64. [64]

    Multicellular muscle-tendon bioprinting of mechanically optimized musculoskeletal bioactua- tors with enhanced force transmission,

    M. Filippi, D. Mock, J. Fuentes, M. Y. Michelis, A. Balciunaite, P. Paniagua, R. Hopf, A. Barteld, S. Eng, A. Badolato, J. Snedeker, M. Guix, S. Sanchez, and R. K. Katzschmann, “Multicellular muscle-tendon bioprinting of mechanically optimized musculoskeletal bioactua- tors with enhanced force transmission,”Science Advances, vol. 11, no. 29, p. eadv2628, 2025

    work page 2025

  65. [65]

    Bio-hybrid cell-based actuators for microsystems,

    R. W. Carlsen and M. Sitti, “Bio-hybrid cell-based actuators for microsystems,”Small, vol. 10, no. 19, pp. 3831–3851, 2014

    work page 2014

  66. [66]

    Sen- sorimotor control of robots mediated by electrophysiological measurements of fungal mycelia,

    A. K. Mishra, J. Kim, H. Baghdadi, B. R. Johnson, K. T. Hodge, and R. F. Shepherd, “Sen- sorimotor control of robots mediated by electrophysiological measurements of fungal mycelia,” Science Robotics, vol. 9, no. 93, p. eadk8019, 2024

    work page 2024

  67. [67]

    Immune Cell-Based Microrobots for Remote Magnetic Actuation, Antitumor Activity, and Medical Imaging,

    N. O. Dogan, E. Suadiye, P. Wrede, J. Lazovic, C. B. Dayan, R. H. Soon, A. Aghakhani, G. Richter, and M. Sitti, “Immune Cell-Based Microrobots for Remote Magnetic Actuation, Antitumor Activity, and Medical Imaging,”Advanced Healthcare Materials, vol. 13, no. 23, p. 2400711, 2024

    work page 2024

  68. [68]

    A scalable pipeline for designing reconfigurable organisms,

    S. Kriegman, D. Blackiston, M. Levin, and J. Bongard, “A scalable pipeline for designing reconfigurable organisms,”Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, vol. 117, no. 4, pp. 1853–1859, 2020

    work page 2020

  69. [69]

    Necrobotics: Biotic Materials as Ready-to-Use Actuators,

    T. F. Yap, Z. Liu, A. Rajappan, T. J. Shimokusu, and D. J. Preston, “Necrobotics: Biotic Materials as Ready-to-Use Actuators,”Advanced Science, vol. 9, no. 29, p. 2201174, 2022

    work page 2022

  70. [70]

    3D necroprinting: Leveraging biotic material as the nozzle for 3D printing,

    J. Puma, Z. Yang, E. Johnston, Z. Zhang, X. Lan, L. Zhang, H. Hou, Z. He, A. Afify, M. A. Creighton, J. Li, and C. Cao, “3D necroprinting: Leveraging biotic material as the nozzle for 3D printing,”Science Advances, vol. 11, no. 47, p. eadw9953, 2025-11-19

    work page 2025

  71. [72]

    Dead Matter, Living Machines: Repurposing Crustaceans’ Abdomen Exoskeleton for Bio-Hybrid Robots,

    S. Kim, K. Gilday, and J. Hughes, “Dead Matter, Living Machines: Repurposing Crustaceans’ Abdomen Exoskeleton for Bio-Hybrid Robots,”Advanced Science, vol. 13, no. 15, p. e17712, 2026

    work page 2026

  72. [73]

    SKOOTR: A SKating, Omni-Oriented, Tripedal Robot,

    A. J. Hung, C. E. Adu, and T. Y. Moore, “SKOOTR: A SKating, Omni-Oriented, Tripedal Robot,” in2025 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 15921–15928, IEEE, 2025

    work page 2025

  73. [74]

    Emergent Sequential Motion Through Compliant Auxetic Shells,

    A. Sedal, M. Kohler, G. Agbofode, T. Y. Moore, and S. Kota, “Emergent Sequential Motion Through Compliant Auxetic Shells,” in2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelli- gent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 10238–10244, IEEE, 2023

    work page 2023

  74. [75]

    Tail- assisted pitch control in lizards, robots and dinosaurs,

    T. Libby, T. Y. Moore, E. Chang-Siu, D. Li, D. J. Cohen, A. Jusufi, and R. J. Full, “Tail- assisted pitch control in lizards, robots and dinosaurs,”Nature, vol. 481, no. 7380, pp. 181–184, 2012

    work page 2012

  75. [76]

    Event-based visual inertial odometry,

    A. Z. Zhu, N. Atanasov, and K. Daniilidis, “Event-based visual inertial odometry,” in2017 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pp. 5816–5824, 2017

    work page 2017

  76. [77]

    Mahowald,The Silicon Retina, pp

    M. Mahowald,The Silicon Retina, pp. 4–65. Boston, MA: Springer US, 1994. 17

    work page 1994

  77. [78]

    Precise dynamic turning of a 10 cm legged robot on a low friction surface using a tail,

    N. J. Kohut, A. O. Pullin, D. W. Haldane, D. Zarrouk, and R. S. Fearing, “Precise dynamic turning of a 10 cm legged robot on a low friction surface using a tail,” in2013 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Robotics and Automation, pp. 3299–3306, IEEE, 2013

    work page 2013

  78. [79]

    Release chamber enables suction cup to delaminate and harvest fluid,

    X. Bu, Y. Geng, S. Yin, L. Luo, C. A. Aubin, and T. Y. Moore, “Release chamber enables suction cup to delaminate and harvest fluid,” in2025 IEEE 8th International Conference on Soft Robotics (RoboSoft), pp. 1–6, IEEE, 2025

    work page 2025

  79. [80]

    Neuroscience-inspired artificial intelligence,

    D. Hassabis, D. Kumaran, C. Summerfield, and M. Botvinick, “Neuroscience-inspired artificial intelligence,”Neuron, vol. 95, no. 2, pp. 245–258, 2017

    work page 2017

  80. [81]

    A survey of evolutionary algorithms for multi-objective optimization problems with irregular pareto fronts,

    Y. Hua, Q. Liu, K. Hao, and Y. Jin, “A survey of evolutionary algorithms for multi-objective optimization problems with irregular pareto fronts,”IEEE/CAA Journal of Automatica Sinica, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 303–318, 2021

    work page 2021

Showing first 80 references.