MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399213366 · doi:10.1145/3639477.3639740

Towards Building AI-CPS with NVIDIA Isaac Sim: An Industrial Benchmark and Case Study for Robotics Manipulation

2024· article· en· W4399213366 on OpenAlexaff
Zhehua Zhou, Jiayang Song, Xuan Xie, Zhan Shu, Lei Ma, Dikai Liu, Jianxiong Yin, Simon See

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBenchmark (surveying)RoboticsArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceComputer architectureRobotCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a representative cyber-physical system (CPS), robotic manipulators have been widely adopted in various academic research and industrial processes, indicating their potential to act as a universal interface between the cyber and the physical worlds. Recent studies in robotics manipulation have started employing artificial intelligence (AI) approaches as controllers to achieve better adaptability and performance. However, the inherent challenge of explaining AI components introduces uncertainty and unreliability to these AI-enabled robotics systems, necessitating a reliable development platform for system design and performance assessment. As a foundational step towards building reliable AI-enabled robotics systems, in this paper, we propose a public benchmark for robotics manipulation. It leverages NVIDIA Omniverse Isaac Sim as the simulation platform, encompassing eight representative manipulation tasks and multiple AI software controllers. An extensive empirical evaluation is conducted to analyze the performance of AI controllers in solving robotics manipulation tasks, enabling a relatively thorough understanding of their effectiveness. To further demonstrate the applicability of our benchmark, we also developed the first falsification framework that is compatible with Isaac Sim. This framework bridges the gap between traditional falsification methods and modern physics engine-based simulations. The effectiveness of different optimization methods in falsifying AI-enabled robotics manipulation with physical simulators is also examined. Our work not only establishes a foundation for the design and development of AI-enabled robotics systems but also provides practical experience and guidance to practitioners in this field, promoting further research in this critical academic and industrial domain. The benchmarks, source code, and detailed evaluation results are available at https://sites.google.com/view/ai-cps-robotics-manipulation/home.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations35
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207