Facilitating Sim-to-Real by Intrinsic Stochasticity of Real-Time Simulation in Reinforcement Learning for Robot Manipulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simulation is essential to reinforcement learning (RL) before implementation in the real world, especially for safety-critical applications like robot manipulation. Conventionally, RL agents are sensitive to the discrepancies between the simulation and the real world, known as the sim-to-real gap. The application of domain randomization, a technique used to fill this gap, is limited to the imposition of heuristic-randomized models. We investigate the properties of intrinsic stochasticity of real-time simulation (RT-IS) of off-the-shelf simulation software and its potential to improve RL performance. This improvement includes a higher tolerance to noise and model imprecision and superiority to conventional domain randomization in terms of ease of use and automation. Firstly, we conduct analytical studies to measure the correlation of RT-IS with the utilization of computer hardware and validate its comparability with the natural stochasticity of a physical robot. Then, we exploit the RT-IS feature in the training of an RL agent. The simulation and physical experiment results verify the feasibility and applicability of RT-IS to robust agent training for robot manipulation tasks. The RT-IS-powered RL agent outperforms conventional agents on robots with modeling uncertainties. RT-IS requires less heuristic randomization, is not task-dependent, and achieves better generalizability than the conventional domain-randomization-powered agents. Our findings provide a new perspective on the sim-to-real problem in practical applications like robot manipulation tasks.
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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".