PreprintCited by 63Robot Manipulation and Learning3D Shape Modeling and AnalysisAdvanced Vision and Imaging

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

ScrewNet: Category-Independent Articulation Model Estimation From Depth Images Using Screw Theory

Open access

Abstract

Robots in human environments will need to interact with a wide variety of articulated objects such as cabinets, drawers, and dishwashers while assisting humans in performing day-to-day tasks. Existing methods either require objects to be textured or need to know the articulation model category a priori for estimating the model parameters for an articulated object. We propose ScrewNet, a novel approach that estimates an object's articulation model directly from depth images without requiring a priori knowledge of the articulation model category. ScrewNet uses screw theory to unify the representation of different articulation types and perform category-independent articulation model estimation. We evaluate our approach on two benchmarking datasets and compare its performance with a current state-of-the-art method. Results demonstrate that ScrewNet can successfully estimate the articulation models and their parameters for novel objects across articulation model categories with better on average accuracy than the prior state-of-the-art method. Project webpage: https://pearl-utexas.github.io/ScrewNet/

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

DataCite · 10.48550/arxiv.2008.10518

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 35

  1. Advait Jain and Charles C Kemp. "Pulling open novel doors and drawers with equilibrium point control". In: Humanoid Robots, 2009. Humanoids 2009. 9th IEEE-RAS International Conference on. IEEE. 2009, pp. 498-505.
  2. Manuel Baum et al. "Opening a lockbox through physical exploration". In: 2017 IEEE-RAS 17th In- ternational Conference on Humanoid Robotics (Hu- manoids). IEEE. 2017, pp. 461-467.
  3. Abhishek Gupta et al. "Relay Policy Learning: Solv- ing Long-Horizon Tasks via Imitation and Reinforce- ment Learning". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.11956 (2019). · arXiv
  4. Oliver Kroemer, Scott Niekum, and George Konidaris. "A Review of Robot Learning for Manipulation: Chal- lenges, Representations, and Algorithms". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1907.03146 (2019). · arXiv
  5. Ajinkya Jain and Scott Niekum. "Efficient hierarchical robot motion planning under uncertainty and hybrid dynamics". In: Conference on Robot Learning. 2018, pp. 757-766.
  6. Jürgen Sturm, Cyrill Stachniss, and Wolfram Burgard. "A probabilistic framework for learning kinematic models of articulated objects". In: Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 41 (2011), pp. 477-526.
  7. Scott Niekum et al. "Online bayesian changepoint de- tection for articulated motion models". In: 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE. 2015, pp. 1468-1475.
  8. Yizhou Liu et al. "Learning Articulated Constraints From a One-Shot Demonstration for Robot Manipula- tion Planning". In: IEEE Access 7 (2019), pp. 172584- 172596.
  9. Sudeep Pillai, Matthew R Walter, and Seth Teller. "Learning articulated motions from visual demonstra- tion". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1502.01659 (2015). · arXiv
  10. Roberto Martín-Martín and Oliver Brock. "Coupled recursive estimation for online interactive perception of articulated objects". In: The International Journal of Robotics Research (2019), p. 0278364919848850.
  11. Ajinkya Jain and Scott Niekum. "Learning hybrid object kinematics for efficient hierarchical planning under uncertainty". In: IEEE International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (2020).
  12. Ben Abbatematteo, Stefanie Tellex, and George Konidaris. "Learning to Generalize Kinematic Mod- els to Novel Objects". In: Proceedings of the Third Conference on Robot Learning. 2019.
  13. Xiaolong Li et al. "Category-Level Articulated Object Pose Estimation". In: Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion. 2020, pp. 3706-3715.
  14. Fanbo Xiang et al. "SAPIEN: A SimulAted Part-based Interactive ENvironment". In: The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). June 2020.
  15. Kaichun Mo et al. "PartNet: A Large-Scale Bench- mark for Fine-Grained and Hierarchical Part-Level 3D Object Understanding". In: The IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR). June 2019.
  16. Angel X Chang et al. "Shapenet: An information- rich 3d model repository". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:1512.03012 (2015). · arXiv
  17. Jürgen Sturm et al. "Learning Kinematic Models for Articulated Objects." In: IJCAI. 2009, pp. 1851-1856.
  18. Roberto Martín-Martín and Oliver Brock. "Online interactive perception of articulated objects with multi- level recursive estimation based on task-specific pri- ors". In: 2014 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems. IEEE. 2014, pp. 2494- 2501.
  19. Karol Hausman et al. "Active articulation model esti- mation through interactive perception". In: Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2015 IEEE International Conference on. IEEE. 2015, pp. 3305-3312.
  20. Jeannette Bohg et al. "Interactive perception: Leverag- ing action in perception and perception in action". In: IEEE Transactions on Robotics 33.6 (2017), pp. 1273- 1291.
  21. Dov Katz and Oliver Brock. "Manipulating articulated objects with interactive perception". In: 2008 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE. 2008, pp. 272-277.
  22. Dov Katz et al. "Interactive segmentation, tracking, and kinematic modeling of unknown 3d articulated objects". In: 2013 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. IEEE. 2013, pp. 5003- 5010.
  23. Roberto Martín-Martín, Sebastian Höfer, and Oliver Brock. "An integrated approach to visual perception of articulated objects". In: 2016 IEEE International Con- ference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE. 2016, pp. 5091-5097.
  24. Frank Michel et al. "Pose Estimation of Kinematic Chain Instances via Object Coordinate Regression." In: BMVC. 2015, pp. 181-1.
  25. Karthik Desingh et al. "Factored pose estimation of articulated objects using efficient nonparametric be- lief propagation". In: 2019 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE. 2019, pp. 7221-7227.
  26. Li Yi et al. "Deep part induction from articulated object pairs". In: SIGGRAPH Asia 2018 Tech. Pap. SIGGRAPH Asia 2018. Vol. 37. 2018. DOI: 10 . 1145/3272127.3275027. eprint: 1809.07417. URL: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/ 3272127.3275027. · DOI
  27. Alexey Bochkovskiy, Chien-Yao Wang, and Hong- Yuan Mark Liao. "YOLOv4: Optimal Speed and Accuracy of Object Detection". In: arXiv preprint arXiv:2004.10934 (2020). · arXiv
  28. Claudia Pérez-D'Arpino and Julie A Shah. "C-learn: Learning geometric constraints from demonstrations for multi-step manipulation in shared autonomy". In: Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2017 IEEE Interna- tional Conference on. IEEE. 2017, pp. 4058-4065.
  29. Andrea F Daniele, Thomas M Howard, and Matthew R Walter. "A multiview approach to learning articulated motion models". In: Robotics Research. Springer, 2020, pp. 371-386.
  30. Bruno Siciliano and Oussama Khatib. Springer hand- book of robotics. Springer, 2016.
  31. Matthew T Mason. Mechanics of robotic manipula- tion. MIT press, 2001.
  32. Yan-bin Jia. "Plücker Coordinates for Lines in the Space [Lecture Notes]". In: (Aug. 2019), pp. 1-11.
  33. Adrien Bartoli and Peter Sturm. "The 3D line motion matrix and alignment of line reconstructions". In: Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Computer Society Con- ference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. CVPR 2001. Vol. 1. IEEE. 2001, pp. I-I.
  34. Kaiming He et al. "Deep residual learning for image recognition". In: Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition. 2016, pp. 770-778.
  35. Emanuel Todorov, Tom Erez, and Yuval Tassa. "Mu- joco: A physics engine for model-based control". In: 2012 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelli- gent Robots and Systems. IEEE. 2012, pp. 5026-5033. Dishwasher -Baseline 0.082 ± 0.000 46.267 ± 20.247 9.735 ± 4.600 deg Dishwasher -NoLSTM 41.485 ± 41.184 9.815 ± 6.782 5.415 ± 4.097 deg Dishwasher -L2 Error 25.405 ± 15.119 12.653 ± 8.119 7.828 ± 1.913 deg Dishwasher -2 imgs 1.935 ± 0.021 11.544 ± 4.729 5.706 ± 4.152 deg Dishwasher -Ours 11.850 ± 15.267 6.789 ± 5.630 6.081 ± 3.043 deg Oven -Baseline 0.082 ± 0.000 81.429 ± 27.244 13.026 ± 4.670 deg Oven -NoLSTM 29.968 ± 39.034 11.014 ± 13.235 10.574 ± 6.332 deg Oven -L2 Error 27.197 ± 13.103 26.452 ± 14.704 11.823 ± 1.067 deg Oven -2 imgs 1.939 ± 0.018 4.791 ± 1.370 10.498 ± 7.481 deg Oven -Ours 7.881 ± 7.763 6.786 ± 2.443 5.010 ± 1.233 deg Microwave -Baseline 0.082 ± 0.000 26.781 ± 10.273 11.856 ± 2.456 deg Microwave -NoLSTM 40.911 ± 32.830 15.993 ± 14.080 3.865 ± 2.350 deg Microwave -L2 Error 60.566 ± 7.705 59.286 ± 6.485 7.463 ± 1.612 deg Microwave -2 imgs 91.826 ± 0.012 11.994 ± 2.549 5.212 ± 3.606 deg Microwave -Ours 24.959 ± 24.847 15.271 ± 13.561 3.507 ± 1.987 deg Drawer-1 col. -Baseline 0.082 ± 0.000 79.228 ± 13.944 17.524 ± 3.700 cm Drawer-1 col. -NoLSTM 42.318 ± 35.604 47.991 ± 29.586 10.923 ± 6.449 cm Drawer-1 col. -L2 Error 48.136 ± 9.533 60.046 ± 19.375 14.202 ± 2.153 cm Drawer -1 col. -2 imgs 89.372 ± 0.047 80.356 ± 8.087 25.753 ± 18.374 cm Drawer-1 col. -Ours 19.876 ± 21.684 28.329 ± 15.005 5.729 ± 4.259 cm Drawer-Multi. cols. -Baseline 0.082 ± 0.000 63.064 ± 18.913 4.483 ± 6.403 cm Drawer-Multi. cols.-NoLSTM 38.393 ± 33.113 49.419 ± 23.998 6.181 ± 5.228 cm Drawer-Multi. cols.-L2 Error 38.866 ± 5.243 44.422 ± 26.927 6.422 ± 0.766 cm Drawer-Multi. cols. -2 imgs 89.361 ± 0.053 78.131 ± 4.888 12.229 ± 3.961 cm Drawer-Multi. cols. -Ours 9.292 ± 15.295 17.813 ± 14.719 0.915 ± 1.772 cm V

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Jain, A., Lioutikov, R., Chuck, C., & Niekum, S.
Affiliations
The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2020
Pages
13670-13677
ISSN
1050-4729 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W3081486916
Cited by
63
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 11 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 1
FWCI
17.53
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1749204, W911NF-19, 1925082, 1638107, 1724157)
  • University of Texas at Austin (N00014-18-2243)
  • Office of Naval Research (N00014-18, W911NF-19-2-0333, N00014-18-2243, FA9550, N00014)
  • Air Force Office of Scientific Research (FA9550-, FA9550-20-1, FA9550-20-1-0077, FA9550-20)
  • Army Research Office (78372-CS, W911NF19-2-0333, W911NF, W911NF-19)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Graphics and Computer-Aided Design › 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Vision and Imaging
Keywords
screw theory, depth images, human-robot interaction, household products, robotic manipulation, model parameter estimation

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review