At the World Humanoid Robot Games in Beijing, a humanoid robot named Tiangong Ultra ran the 100-metre sprint in a staggering 8.64 seconds, shattering Jamaican sprinter Usain Bolt’s legendary human world record of 9.58 seconds.

The internet laughed at the robots’ awkward, lurching finishes and spectacular falls – but the laughter masked a chilling reality.

Just two days after the games concluded the official newspaper of China’s People’s Liberation Army (PLA) called for researchers to accelerate moving these cutting-edge machines from the laboratory to military training grounds. They referred to them not as experiments, but as “combatants”.

As a robotics researcher myself, working daily with robot simulation, reinforcement learning, and the foundational software and simulation tools that power them (such as ROS 2 and Gazebo), I watch these developments with a mix of awe and deep concern.

The public often views humanoid robots as clunky sci-fi novelties. The reality is far different: the hardware is already highly capable, and the software is advancing at an unprecedented pace.

But the real story is not just that a robot can beat a human on a running track. It’s what that performance reveals: China’s ability to integrate motors, reducers (gears used in precise joint movement), sensors, control software, testing infrastructure and manufacturing capacity into one unified industrial system.

A sprinting humanoid is not just a stunt. At high speeds, every foot strike creates violent ground reaction forces. Balance corrections must happen in milliseconds, as a single small error can send the machine crashing into the barrier.

For decades, the physical mechanics of humanoid robots, including the actuators (a component, such as a motor, that converts energy into physical movement), sensors, and the sheer physics of bipedal balance, were the main hurdles. Today, those mechanical problems are largely solved.

Carbon fibre and aluminium bodies keep mass and inertia (how a robot’s mass resists change) low. Advancements in actuator technology deliver torque capacities of up to 400Nm (Newton-metres – a unit of torque, or twisting force) in humanoid joints, providing the ultimate combination of power and agility.

What you saw on the track in Beijing was not just a triumph of motors, but a triumph of coding. A real breakthrough is happening in software.

Robots are trained in virtual simulation environments, running millions of trial-and-error scenarios through reinforcement learning before the robot ever takes a physical step. Reinforcement learning is an area of artificial intelligence (AI) where robots make decisions based on the results of their actions.

This allows them to learn how to recover from trips, adjust to uneven ground, and process chaotic environments in real time. Humanoid robots are rapidly bridging the gap between controlled laboratory conditions and the unpredictable real world.

Tracks vs legs

But all this leads to an inevitable question: why would a military want a complex, expensive humanoid when they could use vastly cheaper, rugged, tracked or wheeled drones? In open-field combat, tracked vehicles are absolutely superior. They heave bigger payloads, carry thick ballistic armour, and are far more energy efficient.

However, the nature of conflict is changing – and urban environments play an increasing role in military thinking. Cities are built exclusively for humans. A tracked robot cannot easily climb a vertical fire escape ladder, turn a standard door handle, squeeze through a narrow, debris filled stairwell, or sit in the driver’s seat of a captured supply truck.

A humanoid robot acts as a “drop-in replacement” for a human soldier. If a building is designed for a human to navigate, a humanoid robot can navigate it without requiring custom redesigns or specialised ramps.

This brings us to a profound ethical crossroads. Many of us in the robotics field do not endorse offensive warfare. But these machines have an undeniable utility in defensive scenarios and those concerned with neutralising threats to military personnel and civilians.

Sending a humanoid into a building to rescue hostages, neutralising an active threat such as hostage-takers, or clearing a booby trapped room saves human lives.

Dual-use tech

In fact, the modern surge in humanoid robotics was largely kickstarted by the US government’s Darpa Robotics Challenge, which funded bipedal robots specifically to respond to disasters such as the Fukushima nuclear meltdown where human responders could not survive.

The dilemma is that the technology is agnostic to intent. The baseline capabilities required to navigate a ruined building and extract a casualty are the same capabilities needed to enter a building and kill enemy soldiers. If the technology is ready for defence, it is also ready for offensive use.

Perhaps the most alarming aspect of this rapid advancement is how accessible it is. Unlike nuclear technology or stealth aircraft, modern robotics thrives on open-source frameworks. For example, a military specific software ecosystem (a network of apps and other services that work together) known as ROS-M, along with simulation tools and training datasets, are largely public and shared across global academic communities.

With enough skill, a dedicated adversary can replicate advanced robotic behaviour with relative ease. We can no longer afford to treat humanoid robotics purely as an academic pursuit or a commercial novelty. We need an urgent international conversation about how to control these advances.

Just as we regulate the export of certain microchips and aerospace components, we must begin protecting the software architecture and training pipelines that give these machines their minds. The hardware is walking out of the lab – it is time our policies caught up.

Kartikeya Walia does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.

The men’s football World Cup presents a unique global opportunity to showcase new football technology – from boots and balls to digital systems designed to enhance both officiating accuracy and fan engagement.

The process of bringing these technologies to the game often begins in universities and other research institutions. The academic journal Sports Engineering, of which I am editor-in-chief, publishes peer-reviewed studies that are closely monitored by the sport’s global governing body, Fifa.

In our two collections of studies so far, prominent research themes include the automatic tracking of players and automated event detection. Another strand focuses on checking how well wearable sensors work within stadium environments.

Data obtained from tracking player movements can be used to create virtual avatars. Use of this technology is being explored to further grow audiences for what is already the world’s most popular sport, both in terms of players and fans.

Goal three of Fifa’s strategic objectives (2023-27) is to “deliver fan engagement including through eFootball, and to invest in digital technology and artificial intelligence for the next generations”.

So what innovations have made it to the current World Cup in North America – and which others are likely to be introduced at future tournaments?

Enhanced viewing angles

Perhaps the most discussed technological innovation at this World Cup is the frequent use of body cameras by referees. This additional view has been widely praised for giving fans a fascinating new perspective on key moments, including goals and what refs saw when making key decisions.

But the revolution in viewing angles doesn’t stop there. An increasingly common aspect of match coverage is 3D recreations – for example, when tight offside decisions are explained following a VAR (video assistant referee) review. These use data on player positions and movements from optical tracking systems to recreate gameplay from new perspectives – potentially giving fans entirely new views of the action, such as from the goalkeeper’s perspective.

Official help

Goal-line technology was first used in the 2014 men’s World Cup to determine whether the whole of the ball had crossed the goal-line. The 2026 World Cup has gone a step further by using out-of-bounds technology for the first time to determine whenever the ball has left the field of play – whether for a throw-in or corner.

Viewers may also notice team officials using a digital substitution tablet in place of handwritten paper notes to explain the player swaps they wish to make. This makes it easier for substitutions to be approved by match officials and rapidly communicated to broadcasters – while also being “less sensitive to weather conditions” in the form of a rain-sodden notepad.

Data analytics

Fifa has pledged that for this World Cup, all 48 teams should “benefit from the same pre- and post-match analytical capabilities” through its AI Pro system. The system uses “AI agents capable of querying structured match data” to deliver rapid tactical insights, performance analyses and strategic recommendations.

Researchers are also exploring how to track players and automatically detect events using broadcast video footage, rather than additional specialist camera technology. Ensuring these capabilities are made available beyond the game’s elite leagues is seen as important for democratising the way the game develops.

The ball

Each World Cup sees the introduction of a new ball. The 2026 Adidas Trionda features four uniquely shaped panels – the smallest number ever used to make a World Cup ball.

These panels, made of polyurethane, have grooves and small, raised surface features in the form of eagle, maple leaf and star symbols to reflect the three host nations. Along with the seams, these are intended to give the ball desirable aerodynamics that produces predictable and stable flight behaviour.

Like its predecessor, the Trionda also has an internal sensor that can sample data at 500 times per second to measure its movement. This is relayed to match officials in real time, supporting their decision-making.

Fifa’s football testing manual even incorporates a balance test for balls with this internal sensor. This is to ensure the internal sensor does cause the ball to behave unpredictably when rolling or in the air.

Pitches

Some players at this World Cup have complained about the temporary grass pitches used at some stadiums feeling “more like an artificial surface”.

There is a huge amount of research on the effect of pitches on player performance, including injury risk. This can be particularly important for female players, for whom knee injuries are more prevalent.

The latest football turf testing manual includes a “critical fall height test”. This is designed to ensure surfaces are sufficiently soft and compliant to avoid posing an excessive head injury risk to players falling from a minimum of 0.6 metres.

Boot design

Academic research continually informs updates in football boot design. For example, it has shown that padding on the upper section of the boot can hinder shooting accuracy.

We are now starting to see 3D-printed boots worn by some players. These boots use metamaterials – artificially-made materials with unconventional properties – that promise to improve fit and comfort.

While you may see a few of these boots at this World Cup, the inexorable march of technology means you can expect such designs to be a common sight in Morocco, Portugal and Spain in four years’ time – along with many other new innovations currently at the research stage.

Thomas Allen has received research funding from FIFA. He is the Editor-in-Chief of the Sports Engineering journal.