Knowledge enhanced bottom-up affordance grounding for robotic interaction
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
With the rapid advancement of robotics technology, an increasing number of researchers are exploring the use of natural language as a communication channel between humans and robots. In scenarios where language conditioned manipulation grounding, prevailing methods rely heavily on supervised multimodal deep learning. In this paradigm, robots assimilate knowledge from both language instructions and visual input. However, these approaches lack external knowledge for comprehending natural language instructions and are hindered by the substantial demand for a large amount of paired data, where vision and language are usually linked through manual annotation for the creation of realistic datasets. To address the above problems, we propose the knowledge enhanced bottom-up affordance grounding network (KBAG-Net), which enhances natural language understanding through external knowledge, improving accuracy in object grasping affordance segmentation. In addition, we introduce a semi-automatic data generation method aimed at facilitating the quick establishment of the language following manipulation grounding dataset. The experimental results on two standard dataset demonstrate that our method outperforms existing methods with the external knowledge. Specifically, our method outperforms the two-stage method by 12.98% and 1.22% of mIoU on the two dataset, respectively. For broader community engagement, we will make the semi-automatic data construction method publicly available at https://github.com/wmqu/Automated-Dataset-Construction4LGM.
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.
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Simulation or modeling | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Methods About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Simulation or modeling | medium |
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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