MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286611254 · doi:10.1145/3528223.3530057

Learning to use chopsticks in diverse gripping styles

2022· article· en· W4286611254 on OpenAlexaff
Zeshi Yang, KangKang Yin, Libin Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueACM Transactions on Graphics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKinematicsComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceKey (lock)Motion (physics)Reinforcement learningRoboticsTrajectoryTask (project management)Robustness (evolution)Computer visionRobotEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Learning dexterous manipulation skills is a long-standing challenge in computer graphics and robotics, especially when the task involves complex and delicate interactions between the hands, tools and objects. In this paper, we focus on chopsticks-based object relocation tasks, which are common yet demanding. The key to successful chopsticks skills is steady gripping of the sticks that also supports delicate maneuvers. We automatically discover physically valid chopsticks holding poses by Bayesian Optimization (BO) and Deep Reinforcement Learning (DRL), which works for multiple gripping styles and hand morphologies without the need of example data. Given as input the discovered gripping poses and desired objects to be moved, we build physics-based hand controllers to accomplish relocation tasks in two stages. First, kinematic trajectories are synthesized for the chopsticks and hand in a motion planning stage. The key components of our motion planner include a grasping model to select suitable chopsticks configurations for grasping the object, and a trajectory optimization module to generate collision-free chopsticks trajectories. Then we train physics-based hand controllers through DRL again to track the desired kinematic trajectories produced by the motion planner. We demonstrate the capabilities of our framework by relocating objects of various shapes and sizes, in diverse gripping styles and holding positions for multiple hand morphologies. Our system achieves faster learning speed and better control robustness, when compared to vanilla systems that attempt to learn chopstick-based skills without a gripping pose optimization module and/or without a kinematic motion planner. Our code and models are available at this link. 1

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.206 · 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

Citations25
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACM Transactions on GraphicsSame topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207