MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415192155 · doi:10.1109/iccv51701.2025.00837

PASG: A Closed-Loop Framework for Automated Geometric Primitive Extraction and Semantic Anchoring in Robotic Manipulation

2025· article· en· W4415192155 on OpenAlexaff
Zhihao Zhu, Yifan Zheng, Siyu Pan, Yaohui Jin, Yao Mu

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
FundersFundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities
KeywordsSemantics (computer science)Geometric primitiveTask (project management)Bridging (networking)AffordanceRobotAnchoring

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fragmentation between high-level task semantics and low-level geometric features remains a persistent challenge in robotic manipulation. While vision-language models (VLMs) have shown promise in generating affordance-aware visual representations, the lack of semantic grounding in canonical spaces and reliance on manual annotations severely limit their ability to capture dynamic semantic-affordance relationships. To address these, we propose Primitive-Aware Semantic Grounding (PASG), a closed-loop framework that introduces: (1) Automatic primitive extraction through geometric feature aggregation, enabling cross-category detection of keypoints and axes; (2) VLM-driven semantic anchoring that dynamically couples geometric primitives with functional affordances and task-relevant description; (3) A spatial-semantic reasoning benchmark and a fine-tuned VLM (Qwen2.5VL-PA). We demonstrate PASG's effectiveness in practical robotic manipulation tasks across diverse scenarios, achieving performance comparable to manual annotations. PASG achieves a finer-grained semantic-affordance understanding of objects, establishing a unified paradigm for bridging geometric primitives with task semantics in robotic manipulation.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.834
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207