PreprintCited by 42Robot Manipulation and LearningAI-based Problem Solving and PlanningMultimodal Machine Learning Applications

The DOI matches its DataCite record.

GRID: Scene-Graph-based Instruction-driven Robotic Task Planning

Open access
Ni, Zhe, Deng, Xiaoxin, Tai, Cong, Zhu, Xinyue, Xie, Qinghongbing, Huang, Weihang, Wu, Xiang, Zeng, Long·2023·arXiv

Abstract

Recent works have shown that Large Language Models (LLMs) can facilitate the grounding of instructions for robotic task planning. Despite this progress, most existing works have primarily focused on utilizing raw images to aid LLMs in understanding environmental information. However, this approach not only limits the scope of observation but also typically necessitates extensive multimodal data collection and large-scale models. In this paper, we propose a novel approach called Graph-based Robotic Instruction Decomposer (GRID), which leverages scene graphs instead of images to perceive global scene information and iteratively plan subtasks for a given instruction. Our method encodes object attributes and relationships in graphs through an LLM and Graph Attention Networks, integrating instruction features to predict subtasks consisting of pre-defined robot actions and target objects in the scene graph. This strategy enables robots to acquire semantic knowledge widely observed in the environment from the scene graph. To train and evaluate GRID, we establish a dataset construction pipeline to generate synthetic datasets for graph-based robotic task planning. Experiments have shown that our method outperforms GPT-4 by over 25.4% in subtask accuracy and 43.6% in task accuracy. Moreover, our method achieves a real-time speed of 0.11s per inference. Experiments conducted on datasets of unseen scenes and scenes with varying numbers of objects demonstrate that the task accuracy of GRID declined by at most 3.8%, showcasing its robust cross-scene generalization ability. We validate our method in both physical simulation and the real world. More details can be found on the project page https://jackyzengl.github.io/GRID.github.io/.

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.2309.07726

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: 38

  1. M. Shridhar, L. Manuelli, and D. Fox, "Cliport: What and where pathways for robotic manipulation," in Conference on Robot Learning. PMLR, 2022, pp. 894-906.
  2. D. Driess, F. Xia, M. S. Sajjadi et al., "Palm-e: An embodied multimodal language model," arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.03378, 2023. · arXiv
  3. B. Zitkovich, T. Yu, S. Xu et al., "Rt-2: Vision-language-action models transfer web knowledge to robotic control," in Conference on Robot Learning. PMLR, 2023, pp. 2165-2183.
  4. A. Brohan, Y. Chebotar, C. Finn et al., "Do as i can, not as i say: Grounding language in robotic affordances," in Conference on Robot Learning. PMLR, 2023, pp. 287-318.
  5. S. Nair, A. Rajeswaran, V. Kumar et al., "R3m: A universal visual rep- resentation for robot manipulation," arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.12601, 2022. · arXiv
  6. W. Huang, C. Wang, R. Zhang et al., "Voxposer: Composable 3d value maps for robotic manipulation with language models," arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.05973, 2023. · arXiv
  7. C. Jin, W. Tan, J. Yang et al., "Alphablock: Embodied finetuning for vision-language reasoning in robot manipulation," arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.18898, 2023. · arXiv
  8. O. Mees, J. Borja-Diaz, and W. Burgard, "Grounding language with visual affordances over unstructured data," in 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2023, pp. 11 576-11 582.
  9. Y. Mu, Q. Zhang, M. Hu et al., "Embodiedgpt: Vision-language pre-training via embodied chain of thought," Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, vol. 36, 2024.
  10. I. Armeni, Z.-Y. He, J. Gwak et al., "3d scene graph: A structure for unified semantics, 3d space, and camera," in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, 2019, pp. 5664-5673.
  11. A. Rosinol, A. Gupta, M. Abate et al., "3d dynamic scene graphs: Actionable spatial perception with places, objects, and humans," arXiv preprint arXiv:2002.06289, 2020. · arXiv
  12. J. Wald, H. Dhamo, N. Navab et al., "Learning 3d semantic scene graphs from 3d indoor reconstructions," in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2020, pp. 3961-3970.
  13. S.-C. Wu, J. Wald, K. Tateno et al., "Scenegraphfusion: Incremental 3d scene graph prediction from rgb-d sequences," in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2021, pp. 7515-7525.
  14. S.-C. Wu, K. Tateno, N. Navab et al., "Incremental 3d semantic scene graph prediction from rgb sequences," in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023, pp. 5064-5074.
  15. S. Koch, N. Vaskevicius, M. Colosi et al., "Open3dsg: Open- vocabulary 3d scene graphs from point clouds with queryable objects and open-set relationships," arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.12259, 2024. · arXiv
  16. Y. Zhu, J. Tremblay, S. Birchfield et al., "Hierarchical planning for long-horizon manipulation with geometric and symbolic scene graphs," in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2021, pp. 6541-6548.
  17. S. Amiri, K. Chandan, and S. Zhang, "Reasoning with scene graphs for robot planning under partial observability," IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 5560-5567, 2022.
  18. M. Han, Z. Zhang, Z. Jiao et al., "Scene reconstruction with functional objects for robot autonomy," International Journal of Computer Vision, vol. 130, no. 12, pp. 2940-2961, 2022.
  19. F. Kenghagho Kenfack, F. Ahmed Siddiky, F. Balint-Benczedi et al., "Robotvqa -a scene-graph-and deep-learning-based visual question answering system for robot manipulation," in 2020 IEEE/RSJ Inter- national Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2020, pp. 9667-9674.
  20. R. Liu, X. Wang, W. Wang et al., "Bird's-eye-view scene graph for vision-language navigation," in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), October 2023, pp. 10 968-10 980.
  21. H. Su, W. Shi, J. Kasai et al., "One embedder, any task: Instruction- finetuned text embeddings," arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.09741, 2022. · arXiv
  22. O. Mees, L. Hermann, E. Rosete-Beas et al., "Calvin: A benchmark for language-conditioned policy learning for long-horizon robot ma- nipulation tasks," IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 7327-7334, 2022.
  23. J. Bae, D. Shin, K. Ko et al., "A Survey on 3D Scene Graphs: Defin- ition, Generation and Application," in Robot Intelligence Technology and Applications 7, ser. Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, J. Jo, H.-L. Choi, M. Helbig, H. Oh, J. Hwangbo, C.-H. Lee, and B. Stantic, Eds. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2023, pp. 136-147.
  24. G. Sepulveda, J. C. Niebles, and A. Soto, "A deep learning based behavioral approach to indoor autonomous navigation," in 2018 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA). IEEE, 2018, pp. 4646-4653.
  25. Z. Ravichandran, L. Peng, N. Hughes et al., "Hierarchical Rep- resentations and Explicit Memory: Learning Effective Navigation Policies on 3D Scene Graphs using Graph Neural Networks," in 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), May 2022, pp. 9272-9279.
  26. Z. Jiao, Y. Niu, Z. Zhang et al., "Sequential Manipulation Planning on Scene Graph," in 2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), October 2022, pp. 8203-8210, iSSN: 2153-0866.
  27. K. Rana, J. Haviland, S. Garg et al., "Sayplan: Grounding large language models using 3d scene graphs for scalable task planning," arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.06135, 2023. · arXiv
  28. S. Tellex, N. Gopalan, H. Kress-Gazit et al., "Robots that use lan- guage," Annual Review of Control, Robotics, and Autonomous Systems, vol. 3, pp. 25-55, 2020.
  29. V. S. Dorbala, J. F. Mullen Jr, and D. Manocha, "Can an embodied agent find your "cat-shaped mug"? llm-based zero-shot object navig- ation," IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2023.
  30. A. Radford, J. W. Kim, C. Hallacy et al., "Learning transferable visual models from natural language supervision," in International conference on machine learning. PMLR, 2021, pp. 8748-8763.
  31. E. Jang, A. Irpan, M. Khansari et al., "Bc-z: Zero-shot task generaliza- tion with robotic imitation learning," in Conference on Robot Learning. PMLR, 2022, pp. 991-1002.
  32. C. Lynch, A. Wahid, J. Tompson et al., "Interactive language: Talking to robots in real time," IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2023.
  33. A. Brohan, N. Brown, J. Carbajal et al., "Rt-1: Robotics transformer for real-world control at scale," arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.06817, 2022. · arXiv
  34. P. Velickovic, G. Cucurull, A. Casanova et al., "Graph attention networks," stat, vol. 1050, no. 20, pp. 10-48 550, 2017.
  35. S. Liu, Z. Zeng, T. Ren et al., "Grounding dino: Marrying dino with grounded pre-training for open-set object detection," arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.05499, 2023. · arXiv
  36. G. Chalvatzaki, A. Younes, D. Nandha et al., "Learning to reason over scene graphs: a case study of finetuning gpt-2 into a robot language model for grounded task planning," Frontiers in Robotics and AI, vol. 10, 2023.
  37. M. Shridhar, J. Thomason, D. Gordon et al., "Alfred: A benchmark for interpreting grounded instructions for everyday tasks," in Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recogni- tion, 2020, pp. 10 740-10 749.
  38. R. Gong, J. Huang, Y. Zhao et al., "Arnold: A benchmark for language- grounded task learning with continuous states in realistic 3d scenes," arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.04321, 2023. · arXiv

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ni, Z., Deng, X., Tai, C., Zhu, X., Xie, Q., Huang, W., Wu, X., & Zeng, L.
Affiliations
Tsinghua Shenzhen International Graduate School (CN)
Venue
arXiv
Publisher
arXiv
Published
2023
Pages
13765-13772
ISSN
2153-0858 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4405787186
Cited by
42
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 23 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 1
FWCI
21.89
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › AI-based Problem Solving and Planning
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition › Multimodal Machine Learning Applications
Keywords
robot planning, scene graph, large language models, graph attention networks, subtask decomposition, synthetic data generation, cross-scene generalization, robotic manipulation, object relations

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