ASAP: Automated Sequence Planning for Complex Robotic Assembly with Physical Feasibility
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
The automated assembly of complex products requires a system that can automatically plan a physically feasible sequence of actions for assembling many parts together. In this paper, we present ASAP, a physics-based planning approach for automatically generating such a sequence for general-shaped assemblies. ASAP accounts for gravity to design a sequence where each sub-assembly is physically stable with a limited number of parts being held and a support surface. We apply efficient tree search algorithms to reduce the combinatorial complexity of determining such an assembly sequence. The search can be guided by either geometric heuristics or graph neural networks trained on data with simulation labels. Finally, we show the superior performance of ASAP at generating physically realistic assembly sequence plans on a large dataset of hundreds of complex product assemblies. We further demonstrate the applicability of ASAP on both simulation and real-world robotic setups. Project website: asap.csail.mit.edu
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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