Omnipush: accurate, diverse, real-world dataset of pushing dynamics with RGB-D video
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pushing is a fundamental robotic skill. Existing work has shown how to exploit models of pushing to achieve a variety of tasks, including grasping under uncertainty, in-hand manipulation and clearing clutter. Such models, however, are approximate, which limits their applicability.Learning-based methods can reason directly from raw sensory data with accuracy, and have the potential to generalize to a wider diversity of scenarios. However, developing and testing such methods requires rich-enough datasets. In this paper we introduce Omnipush, a dataset with high variety of planar pushing behavior.In particular, we provide 250 pushes for each of 250 objects, all recorded with RGB-D and a high precision tracking system. The objects are constructed so as to systematically explore key factors that affect pushing-the shape of the object and its mass distribution-which have not been broadly explored in previous datasets, and allow to study generalization in model learning.Omnipush includes a benchmark for meta-learning dynamic models, which requires algorithms that make good predictions and estimate their own uncertainty. We also provide an RGB video prediction benchmark and propose other relevant tasks that can be suited with this dataset. Data and code are available at https://web.mit.edu/mcube/omnipush-dataset/.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.005 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".