I Like to Move It: 6D Pose Estimation as an Action Decision Process
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Object pose estimation is an integral part of robot vision and AR. Previous 6D pose retrieval pipelines treat the problem either as a regression task or discretize the pose space to classify. We change this paradigm and reformulate the problem as an action decision process where an initial pose is updated in incremental discrete steps that sequentially move a virtual 3D rendering towards the correct solution. A neural network estimates likely moves from a single RGB image iteratively and determines so an acceptable final pose. In comparison to other approaches that train object-specific pose models, we learn a decision process. This allows for a lightweight architecture while it naturally generalizes to unseen objects. A coherent stop action for process termination enables dynamic reduction of the computation cost if there are insignificant changes in a video sequence. Instead of a static inference time, we thereby automatically increase the runtime depending on the object motion. Robustness and accuracy of our action decision network are evaluated on Laval and YCB video scenes where we significantly improve the state-of-the-art.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it