| # IBM Double Pendulum Chaotic Dataset — Lagrangian, Hamiltonian and equations of motion |
|
|
| ## Background |
|
|
| A **double pendulum** is a two-degree-of-freedom mechanical system: a second |
| pendulum hung from the tip of a first pendulum. Despite having four state |
| variables (two angles and two angular velocities) and a Lagrangian that fits |
| in one line, it is a canonical physical example of deterministic chaos: two |
| initially near-identical launches diverge exponentially, and no closed-form |
| solution for θ(t) exists beyond the small-angle linearisation. |
|
|
| Asseman, Kornuta & Ozcan (IBM Research AI, NeurIPS 2018 MDSD workshop) built a |
| physical double pendulum, filmed it with a high-speed camera, and released |
| **21 video runs** together with tracked marker positions per frame as the |
| *Double Pendulum Chaotic Dataset*. They argue that the broader spatio-temporal |
| prediction literature has over-fit to simulated physics, and that real |
| apparatus like this one is the right benchmark for chaotic dynamics. |
|
|
| This entry turns the dataset into a symbolic-regression benchmark by framing |
| three ground-truth formulas that any textbook-trained physicist (or LLM) will |
| recognise: |
|
|
| 1. **`eom_theta1`** — the Euler–Lagrange equation of motion for θ̈₁. |
| 2. **`eom_theta2`** — the Euler–Lagrange equation of motion for θ̈₂. |
| 3. **`hamiltonian`** — the total mechanical energy H = T + V. |
|
|
| All three use only `(θ₁, θ₂, ω₁, ω₂)` as inputs. |
|
|
| ## Physical setup (Asseman et al. 2018, Fig. 2b and Tab. 2c) |
|
|
| | quantity | value | source | |
| |----------|-------|--------| |
| | arm 1 length `l₁` (pivot → first datum) | 91 mm | Fig. 2b | |
| | arm 2 length `l₂` (first datum → second) | 70 mm | Fig. 2b | |
| | marker diameter | 19 mm each (three markers) | Fig. 2b | |
| | camera frame rate | 400 Hz | Tab. 2c | |
| | frame exposure | 90 µs | Tab. 2c | |
| | image resolution | 480 × 480 px, 3 channels | Tab. 2c | |
| | camera focal length / distance | 50 mm / 2 m | §2.2 | |
| | bob masses `m₁`, `m₂` | **not reported** | — | |
| | pivot friction / damping model | **not reported** | — | |
|
|
| The three 19 mm fiducial markers are colour-coded: **red** at the pivot, |
| **green** at the end of the upper arm, **blue** at the end of the lower arm. |
| IBM extracts marker positions by 5× upscaling the image, drawing matched |
| templates with scikit-image, and locating them by OpenCV template |
| cross-correlation; each recorded pixel coordinate is therefore **5× the raw |
| pixel position**, preserving sub-pixel precision. |
|
|
| Each run lasts roughly 40 s and contains ~17 500 frames. The pendulum is |
| launched by hand and the camera motion-triggered. Lighting is a DC-powered LED |
| floodlight (no 50/60 Hz flicker); the background is matte black to make the |
| markers easier to track. |
|
|
| ## Ground-truth physics (simple-pendulum form) |
|
|
| With two **point masses** m₁, m₂ on massless rods of length l₁, l₂ hanging from |
| a fixed pivot in uniform gravity g, and angles θ₁, θ₂ measured from the |
| downward vertical, the kinetic and potential energies are |
|
|
| $$T = \tfrac{1}{2} m_1 l_1^2 \dot\theta_1^2 |
| + \tfrac{1}{2} m_2 \bigl[ l_1^2 \dot\theta_1^2 + l_2^2 \dot\theta_2^2 |
| + 2 l_1 l_2 \dot\theta_1 \dot\theta_2 \cos(\theta_1 - \theta_2) \bigr]$$ |
|
|
| $$V = -m_1 g l_1 \cos\theta_1 - m_2 g \bigl( l_1 \cos\theta_1 + l_2 \cos\theta_2 \bigr)$$ |
|
|
| with Lagrangian L = T − V and Hamiltonian H = T + V. Applying the |
| Euler–Lagrange equations and solving the resulting 2 × 2 linear system for |
| θ̈₁, θ̈₂ gives the closed form used by `formulas/eom_theta1.py` and |
| `formulas/eom_theta2.py`. These match the Wikipedia "Double pendulum" article |
| and Levien & Tan, *Am. J. Phys.* 61 (1993) 1038. All three formula modules were |
| verified bit-exact against an RK4-integrated trajectory: `max |f(X) − θ̈|` was |
| numerically 0.0 on 500 test points, and H is conserved to ~1 × 10⁻⁵ J/kg over |
| a 20 s integration (integrator error only). |
|
|
| ## Why the real-apparatus fit is imperfect |
|
|
| 1. **Unreported bob masses.** IBM's paper gives arm lengths but not `m₁, m₂`. |
| The formulas assume `m₁ = m₂ = 1` kg; because the equations for θ̈₁ and θ̈₂ |
| depend on mass ratios only through `m₂ / (2 m₁ + m₂)` and `m₁ + m₂`, the |
| 1:1 assumption is a **systematic bias** if the upper arm's extra rod mass |
| contributes meaningfully to m₁. The functional form remains correct. |
| 2. **Pivot friction and air drag.** Real pendulum dynamics dissipate energy. |
| Fig. 4 of Asseman 2018 shows sequences of 200 time-steps (0.5 s each) in |
| which cos/sin of the arm angles clearly decay in amplitude across the run. |
| H is therefore not a conservation law for the real apparatus — it drifts |
| downward. A symbolic-regression system that recovers the full algebraic |
| form of H and reports a non-flat time series on IBM data is doing exactly |
| what a physics-faithful regressor should do: the drift is data, not noise. |
| 3. **Template-tracking error.** Sub-pixel tracker noise at ~0.2 px in 5× |
| upscaled coordinates translates to an arm-angle noise of ~(0.2 / (l × 5 × |
| px_per_m)) rad per frame. With the centred second-difference estimator of |
| θ̈ this noise is amplified by O(1/dt²) = 1.6 × 10⁵ — so |
| `theta{1,2}_ddot_fd` are the noise-dominated channels in `data.csv`, and |
| reference scores on `eom_theta1` / `eom_theta2` will be bounded from below |
| by tracker noise, not by model mismatch. The `hamiltonian` target uses |
| first differences only (O(1/dt)) and is much cleaner. |
| 4. **Finite-difference scheme.** Centred differences are the default here |
| because Asseman 2018 does not prescribe a derivative estimator. Coarser |
| (one-sided) or smoother (Savitzky–Golay) schemes change the scores by |
| order-of-magnitude factors and are documented in `data/README.md` as the |
| right place to experiment. We deliberately did **not** apply any filter, |
| so the raw noise floor is visible to the searcher. |
| 5. **Launch-by-hand initial conditions.** Each of the 21 runs has an unknown |
| initial angular velocity; the 21 trajectories are chaotic and cannot be |
| stitched into a single coherent phase-space orbit. We ship a single video |
| as `data.csv` by default (contiguous trajectory, ~17 500 rows) and the |
| full concatenation as `data_all_videos.csv` for completeness. |
|
|
| ## Column layout |
|
|
| `data/data.csv` has 16 columns (column 0 = output, columns 1..15 = inputs). |
| See `data/README.md` for the full schema; the short version is that column 0 |
| is `theta1_ddot_fd` (output consumed by `ground_truth[eom_theta1]`), and the |
| two other ground-truth targets (`theta2_ddot_fd`, `H_mpernorm`) are included |
| as columns 5 and 6 for row-alignment. |
|
|
| Upstream columns (`x_red`, `y_red`, `x_green`, `y_green`, `x_blue`, `y_blue`, |
| all in 5×-upscaled pixels) are preserved unchanged as columns 7..12. These |
| are not consumed by any current ground-truth formula; they are available for |
| searchers that want to regress angles from pixel positions instead of using |
| the derived `theta1`, `theta2`. |
|
|
| ## Data availability caveat |
|
|
| At the time this entry was authored, the IBM CDN host |
| `dax-cdn.cdn.appdomain.cloud` was unreachable from the environment. The |
| `data/download.sh` script is documented and correct, but no raw `data.csv` |
| has been generated, so `metadata.yaml` carries `reference_scores: null` for |
| every ground-truth entry. When the script is re-run on a network with CDN |
| access (or after placing the tarball in `data/` by hand), the `__main__` |
| block at the bottom of each `formulas/*.py` will compute the scores against |
| the full 17 500-row single-video `data.csv` and the 210 000-row |
| `data_all_videos.csv`. |
|
|
| ## Contamination tier |
|
|
| **high.** The two-point-mass double-pendulum Lagrangian, Hamiltonian and |
| Euler–Lagrange equations of motion are in every graduate-level classical |
| mechanics textbook (Goldstein, Taylor, Landau–Lifshitz), the Wikipedia |
| article, hundreds of lecture notes and uncountable Python tutorials. A |
| modern LLM will have memorised the algebraic form verbatim. However: |
|
|
| - The specific **apparatus constants** (l₁ = 91 mm, l₂ = 70 mm) and the |
| **specific data** (21 tracked videos from IBM's lab) have much lower |
| memorisation risk — an LLM cannot recite l₁ = 91 mm without looking up |
| Fig. 2b of Asseman 2018. |
| - The **real dissipation** (pivot friction + air drag) is *not* in any |
| textbook because it depends on this particular bearing and these 19 mm |
| disks. A searcher that reports `H = const` will score badly on this |
| dataset; one that reports `H = H₀ exp(-γ t)` or similar is doing |
| honest science. |
|
|
| This entry is therefore best used as a **Track C (red-team)** probe for |
| whether a searcher reproduces the Lagrangian from its own training set, and |
| simultaneously as a **Track B (real + scoreable)** test of whether it can |
| recover the right dissipation structure. Report results on this dataset |
| alongside results on genuinely low-contamination entries. |
|
|
| ## Known limitations |
|
|
| - **Bob masses not in the paper.** All three formulas use `m₁ = m₂ = 1` kg; |
| a searcher that recovers any ratio `m₁ : m₂` is making a legitimate claim |
| that must be evaluated qualitatively (the dataset cannot pin the masses |
| down without a separate calibration measurement). The overall scale of H |
| is similarly unpinned. |
| - **No ground-truth dissipation model.** Asseman 2018 neither measures nor |
| models the pivot friction. A reasonable extension to this entry would be |
| a `dissipation` ground-truth with form `dH/dt = -α ω₁² - β ω₂²` and |
| self-fitted coefficients; we have not written this formula here because |
| no reliable source prescribes its form. |
| - **Single default video.** `data.csv` is video 0 out of 21; `ONLY_VIDEO=k` |
| (0 ≤ k ≤ 20) picks another. `data_all_videos.csv` contains the full |
| concatenation but is ~210 k rows and should not be used as the primary |
| benchmark data without explicit opt-in. |
| - **Finite-difference noise floor.** See §Why the real-apparatus fit is |
| imperfect, point 3. |
| - **License CDLA-Sharing-1.0.** Any re-publication of the data must carry |
| the same licence and attribute Asseman, Kornuta & Ozcan (IBM Research AI, |
| 2018) — the tarball, every derivative `data.csv`, and this benchmark |
| entry included. |
|
|