MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3115127522 · doi:10.3389/frobt.2020.600584

Combining Self-Organizing and Graph Neural Networks for Modeling Deformable Objects in Robotic Manipulation

2020· article· en· W3115127522 on OpenAlexafffund
Angel J. Valencia, Pierre Payeur

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Robotics and AI · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaSecretaría de Educación Superior, Ciencia, Tecnología e Innovación
KeywordsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceGeneralizationObject (grammar)Adaptation (eye)GraphArtificial neural networkMachine learningHuman–computer interactionComputer visionTheoretical computer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modeling deformable objects is an important preliminary step for performing robotic manipulation tasks with more autonomy and dexterity. Currently, generalization capabilities in unstructured environments using analytical approaches are limited, mainly due to the lack of adaptation to changes in the object shape and properties. Therefore, this paper proposes the design and implementation of a data-driven approach, which combines machine learning techniques on graphs to estimate and predict the state and transition dynamics of deformable objects with initially undefined shape and material characteristics. The learned object model is trained using RGB-D sensor data and evaluated in terms of its ability to estimate the current state of the object shape, in addition to predicting future states with the goal to plan and support the manipulation actions of a robotic hand.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.190 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in Robotics and AISame topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207