Paper detail

Evaluating the Effectiveness of Corrective Demonstrations and a Low-Cost Sensor for Dexterous Manipulation

Imitation learning is a promising approach to help robots acquire dexterous manipulation capabilities without the need for a carefully-designed reward or a significant computational effort. However, existing imitation learning approaches require sophisticated data collection infrastructure and struggle to generalize beyond the training distribution. One way to address this limitation is to gather additional data that better represents the full operating conditions. In this work, we investigate characteristics of such additional demonstrations and their impact on performance. Specifically, we study the effects of corrective and randomly-sampled additional demonstrations on learning a policy that guides a five-fingered robot hand through a pick-and-place task. Our results suggest that corrective demonstrations considerably outperform randomly-sampled demonstrations, when the proportion of additional demonstrations sampled from the full task distribution is larger than the number of original demonstrations sampled from a restrictive training distribution. Conversely, when the number of original demonstrations are higher than that of additional demonstrations, we find no significant differences between corrective and randomly-sampled additional demonstrations. These results provide insights into the inherent trade-off between the effort required to collect corrective demonstrations and their relative benefits over randomly-sampled demonstrations. Additionally, we show that inexpensive vision-based sensors, such as LeapMotion, can be used to dramatically reduce the cost of providing demonstrations for dexterous manipulation tasks. Our code is available at https://github.com/GT-STAR-Lab/corrective-demos-dexterous-manipulation.

preprint2022arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.