Label-Free Adaptive Gaussian Sample Consensus Framework for Learning From Perfect and Imperfect Demonstrations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Autonomous robotic surgery represents one of the most groundbreaking advancements in medical technology. Learning from human demonstrations is promising in this domain, which facilitates the transfer of skills from humans to robots. However, the practical application of this method is challenged by the difficulty of acquiring high-quality demonstrations. Surgical tasks often involve complex manipulations and stringent precision requirements, leading to frequent errors in the demonstrations. These imperfect demonstrations adversely affect the performance of controller policies learned from the data. Unlike existing methods that rely on extensive human labeling of demonstrated trajectories, we present a novel label-free adaptive Gaussian sample consensus framework to progressively refine the control policy. We demonstrate the efficacy and practicality of our approach through two experimental studies: a handwriting classification task, providing reproducible ground-truth labels for evaluation, and an endoscopy scanning task, demonstrating the feasibility of our method in a real-world clinical context. Both experiments highlight our method’s capacity to efficiently adapt to and learn from an ongoing stream of imperfect demonstrations.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it