Datasets:

faradayfuture
/

motionSample

@@ -106,17 +106,24 @@ pose_aa[t, 1 + j] = dof_axes[j] * dof[t, j]
 - **Velocities are stored**, low-passed at 20 Hz zero-phase. Most loaders finite-difference
   them at load time instead, which yields noisier values than these — pick one and be consistent.
-## ⚠️ Kinematic reference, not dynamically validated
-These clips come from human motion capture retargeted onto the Master kinematics. No physics
-engine was involved, and they are **not dynamically feasible for the robot as-is**.
 ### Flight-phase gravity is 0.72 g
 Fitting a parabola to the centre-of-mass height over the middle two thirds of each of
 `highjump`'s 5 flight phases gives a vertical acceleration of **−7.090 ± 0.057 m/s²**, not
 −9.807 — a consistent **0.723 g**. The spread across phases is 0.8 %, so this is systematic,
-not noise.
 The likely cause is retargeting that rescaled the motion **spatially** to the robot's
 proportions while keeping the human's **original timing**. Froude similarity requires time to
@@ -147,8 +154,9 @@ with a 400 ms median.
 - **Base pose is not robot-measurable.** It comes from the capture system, so it is valid as an
   offline reference only — never as an observation the robot could produce on its own.
 - Joint angles are all within the URDF position limits, and joint velocities stay inside the
-  URDF velocity limits (0/31 violations, peaking at 95 % of the limit). The clips are
-  **kinematically legal but dynamically inconsistent**.
 ## Validation

 - **Velocities are stored**, low-passed at 20 Hz zero-phase. Most loaders finite-difference
   them at load time instead, which yields noisier values than these — pick one and be consistent.
+## Known characteristics and limits
+These clips are human motion capture retargeted onto the Master kinematics — no physics engine
+was involved in producing them. **They have been run on the real robot**: a whole-body
+motion-tracking controller follows them successfully on hardware.
+Everything below describes the **reference trajectory itself**, not what the robot can do. A
+tracking controller *approximates* a reference; it does not replay it frame-for-frame. So
+"the reference carries 0.72 g through flight" and "it runs on the real robot" are both true and
+not in conflict. Read this section before using a clip as a **per-frame** tracking target, or
+before assuming a number in it describes the machine.
 ### Flight-phase gravity is 0.72 g
 Fitting a parabola to the centre-of-mass height over the middle two thirds of each of
 `highjump`'s 5 flight phases gives a vertical acceleration of **−7.090 ± 0.057 m/s²**, not
 −9.807 — a consistent **0.723 g**. The spread across phases is 0.8 %, so this is systematic,
+not noise, and it is a property of the retargeted reference rather than of the robot.
 The likely cause is retargeting that rescaled the motion **spatially** to the robot's
 proportions while keeping the human's **original timing**. Froude similarity requires time to
 - **Base pose is not robot-measurable.** It comes from the capture system, so it is valid as an
   offline reference only — never as an observation the robot could produce on its own.
 - Joint angles are all within the URDF position limits, and joint velocities stay inside the
+  URDF velocity limits (0/31 violations, peaking at 95 % of the limit). So the clips are
+  **kinematically legal**; the trajectories are just not rigid-body-consistent on their own,
+  which is normal for retargeted references and is what the tracking controller absorbs.
 ## Validation