OCRTOC: A Cloud-Based Competition and Benchmark for Robotic Grasping and Manipulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a cloud-based benchmark for robotic grasping and manipulation, called the OCRTOC benchmark. The benchmark focuses on the object rearrangement problem, specifically table organization tasks. We provide a set of identical real robot setups and facilitate remote experiments of standardized table organization scenarios in varying difficulties. In this workflow, users upload their solutions to our remote server and their code is executed on the real robot setups and scored automatically. After each execution, the OCRTOC team resets the experimental setup manually. We also provide a simulation environment that researchers can use to develop and test their solutions. With the OCRTOC benchmark, we aim to lower the barrier of conducting reproducible research on robotic grasping and manipulation and accelerate progress in this field. Executing standardized scenarios on identical real robot setups allows us to quantify algorithm performances and achieve fair comparisons. Using this benchmark we held a competition in the 2020 International Conference on Intelligence Robots and Systems (IROS 2020). In total, 59 teams took part in this competition worldwide. We present the results and our observations of the 2020 competition, and discuss our adjustments and improvements for the upcoming OCRTOC 2021 competition. The homepage of the OCRTOC competition iswww.ocrtoc.org, and the OCRTOC software package is available athttps://github.com/OCRTOC/OCRTOC_software_package.
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 | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".