PreprintCited by 133Robot Manipulation and LearningAdvanced Neural Network Applications3D Shape Modeling and Analysis

Where2Act: From Pixels to Actions for Articulated 3D Objects

Open access
Mo, Kaichun, Guibas, Leonidas, Mukadam, Mustafa, Gupta, Abhinav, Tulsiani, Shubham·2021·arXiv

Abstract

One of the fundamental goals of visual perception is to allow agents to meaningfully interact with their environment. In this paper, we take a step towards that long-term goal -- we extract highly localized actionable information related to elementary actions such as pushing or pulling for articulated objects with movable parts. For example, given a drawer, our network predicts that applying a pulling force on the handle opens the drawer. We propose, discuss, and evaluate novel network architectures that given image and depth data, predict the set of actions possible at each pixel, and the regions over articulated parts that are likely to move under the force. We propose a learning-from-interaction framework with an online data sampling strategy that allows us to train the network in simulation (SAPIEN) and generalizes across categories. Check the website for code and data release: https://cs.stanford.edu/~kaichun/where2act/

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.2101.02692

Cites

51 of 51 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

8 of the 59 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Zihao Yan, Ruizhen Hu, Xingguang Yan, Luanmin Chen, Oliver Van Kaick, Hao Zhang, and Hui Huang. Rpm-net: Recurrent prediction of motion and parts from point cloud. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 38(6):240, 2019. 2

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mo, K., Guibas, L., Mukadam, M., Gupta, A., & Tulsiani, S.
Affiliations
  • Stanford University (US)
  • Meta (United States) (US)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2021
Pages
6793-6803
OpenAlex
W3120441392
Cited by
132
References
59
Citations by year
2026: 19 · 2025: 29 · 2024: 29 · 2023: 33 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 7
FWCI
31.33
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
National Science Foundation (1763268)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Advanced Neural Network Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › 3D Shape Modeling and Analysis
Keywords
articulated objects, actionable information, pushing and pulling, movable parts, learning from interaction, simulation-based training, depth information, human-robot interaction

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