Difference: ArticulatedSwimming (3 vs. 4)

Contribution:
There are two main contributions of the study. First, they propose an optimization solution for the control of swimming motions of several creatures. Second, their method considers coupling between creature motions and the fluid interactions.

Evaluation:
The study presents results of swimming motions for a variety of animals that have different configurations and constraints. They also successfully tested their method for controlling an artificial creature. They suggest that the resulting motions look natural, and for the short-bodied fish, and the eelm, they are in agreement with the laboratory data in terms of the generated vortex trails. For other creatures, they cannot make a comparison as there is not any data for them.

Reproducibility:
Most of the equations are given and explained throughout the paper. Some of the parameters are also given, e.g. weight values, etc. However there are some parameters that they manually set, e.g. energy bound, which are not stated in the paper. Hence, it's pretty much reproducible but requires some hand tuning of some of the parameters.

Improvements:
The study can be further extended by investigating different functions for the optimization, other than just using a sine function. By that way, they can try to optimize more sophisticated motions, which can then be generalized to generate combinations of those motions. Paper is well-structured, and easy to follow.

-- Main.ooguz - 01 Dec 2011