Robot eye-hand coordination learning by watching human demonstrations: a task function approximation approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We present a robot eye-hand coordination learning method that can directly learn visual task specification by watching human demonstrations. Task specification is represented as a task function, which is learned using inverse reinforcement learning(IRL [1]) by inferring a reward model from state transitions. The learned reward model is then used as continuous feedbacks in an uncalibrated visual servoing(UVS [2]) controller designed for the execution phase. Our proposed method can directly learn from raw videos, which removes the need for hand-engineered task specification. Benefiting from the use of a traditional UVS controller, the training on real robot only happens at initial Jacobian estimation which takes an average of 4-7 seconds for a new task. Besides, the learned policy is independent from a particular robot, thus has the potential of fast adapting to other robot platforms. Various experiments were designed to show that, for a task with certain DOFs, our method can adapt to task/environment changes in target positions, backgrounds, illuminations, and occlusions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".