Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

RL-Driven Data Generation for Robust Vision-Based Dexterous Grasping

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Pith's one-line read Adding RL-generated simulated grasping trajectories to 40 real demonstrations lifts a vision-action policy to 100 percent success on unseen tabletop objects, where real-only training manages 10 percent and sim-only training fails.

desk verdict A sensible pipeline for mixing RL-generated sim data with a few real demos, but the OOD generalization claim is not yet supported by the evidence—few trials, a 40%/10% inconsistency, and test objects that may fall inside the sim shape prior. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.18084 v1 pith:AWS24JUB submitted 2025-04-25 cs.RO

classification cs.RO
keywords dexterousmanipulationvision-actionmodelssimulation-to-realtransferreinforcementlearningimitationdataaugmentationsuperquadricsresidualpolicy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Vision-action models for dexterous grasping need many demonstrations, but real expert data for multi-finger hands is expensive to collect. This paper tries to break that bottleneck by generating large-scale grasping trajectories in simulation with a reinforcement-learned residual policy, then mixing those trajectories with a small number of real demonstrations to fine-tune a vision-action policy. Across four real tabletop objects, the mixed policy succeeds on all of them, including three unseen shapes, while a policy trained only on the real demonstrations fails on most unseen objects and a simulation-only policy fails entirely. If the claim holds, simulation-augmented data can push dexterous grasp policies toward practical generalization without large-scale real-world data collection.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the parameterized grasp skill $f_{\mathrm{grasp}}(s_t,z,o)=\xi_t(z,o)+\pi_\theta(s_t)$: a nominal reference trajectory $\xi_t$ interpolated from a pre-grasp pose to a grasp pose, with the grasp pose estimated from contact-point predictions, plus a residual displacement $\pi_\theta$ output by a PPO-trained policy using privileged simulator information. Superquadrics, $\phi=(a_1,a_2,a_3,\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2)$, provide a compact shape space; sampling $z\sim p(z)$ and $\phi\sim p(\phi)$ yields diverse contact-rich trajectories that are converted into robot-observable state-action pairs and filtered by a lift success condition. This modularity is what lets the generated data stay consistent with human demonstrations while still adapting finger motion to new geometries.

What would settle it

Run the same mixed-data training and real-world evaluation on objects whose superquadric parameters lie outside the sampled ranges, for example a thin disk with $a_3 < 5$ cm, a long rod with $a_3 > 10$ cm, a sphere-like shape with $\epsilon_1,\epsilon_2$ near small values, or a non-convex object; if the mixed policy's success rate falls substantially below 100 percent, the claimed generalization is bounded by the simulation prior. Also, training with the same pipeline but withholding the 40 real demonstrations would test how much of the robustness comes from real grounding.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a dexterous grasping policy can generalize to unseen object geometries when its training set combines a small set of real demonstrations with a much larger set of trajectories generated by an RL-based grasp skill in simulation. The authors report 100 percent success on all four test objects with the mixed policy, versus 10 percent on out-of-distribution objects for the real-only policy and 0 percent for the simulation-only policy. The mechanism is a two-part grasp skill: a parameterized reference trajectory, defined by an approach direction and a grasp pose, plus a residual policy trained with PPO on privileged simulator state such as object pose, contacts, and fingertip forces, which adapts finger motions to each object instance. Object shape is varied through superquadric parameters, and sampling these parameters generates geometrically diverse training data.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the superquadric shapes sampled in simulation are representative of the real objects the policy will encounter; the out-of-distribution test objects are all convex boxes whose dimensions lie within the sampled ranges, so the demonstrated 'unseen object' generalization may not carry over to genuinely novel shape classes.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Mixing roughly 100 simulated trajectories per real demonstration can push dexterous grasp success from 10 percent to 100 percent on the tested unseen objects.
  • Simulation-only training transfers poorly in this setting, so real grounding remains necessary for robust vision-based dexterous grasping.
  • Sampling approach directions from real demonstrations keeps simulated grasps plausible enough to serve as imitation training data.
  • The reference-plus-residual structure lets the real-to-sim-to-real data-augmentation paradigm work for contact-rich multi-finger manipulation when finger motion is generated by RL rather than reused from demonstrations.
  • The data-generation pipeline can be tuned through the skill prior $p(z)$ and the superquadric shape prior $p(\phi)$, making the diversity of generated grasps a controllable knob for downstream policy robustness.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The generalization claim is demonstrated only on convex box-like objects whose superquadric parameters fall inside the sampled ranges; whether the approach extends to concave, articulated, or otherwise non-superquadric objects is untested.
  • Because only the final transformer layers are fine-tuned while the vision encoder stays frozen, the measured gains may come mostly from action-space diversity rather than improved visual features; this could be tested by varying the amount of visual augmentation.
  • A natural scaling experiment would fix the simulation set and reduce the real demonstrations well below 40 to find the minimum real-data budget the mixed policy needs.
  • The framework could be pointed at other grasp families such as side, pinch, or power grasps by changing the skill-parameter prior, which would test whether approach-direction sampling is the key ingredient behind the reported robustness.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes an RL-driven simulation data-generation pipeline for vision-based dexterous grasping. A parameterized grasp skill consisting of a reference trajectory plus a residual PPO policy is executed in IsaacGym over superquadric object shapes sampled from p(phi), with approach directions sampled from p(z) estimated from real demonstrations, to synthesize training trajectories. These simulated trajectories are mixed with 40 real demonstrations and used to fine-tune Octo-Medium. In real-world tests with one in-distribution object and two out-of-distribution objects, the mixed policy achieves 10/10 OOD successes, while the real-only policy achieves 1/10 and the sim-only policy 0/10; the authors conclude that simulation-augmented data substantially improves generalization to unseen shapes, sizes, and textures.

Significance. The contribution is timely and the two-part control decomposition (reference trajectory plus residual RL policy) is a sensible way to make synthetic dexterous data generation tractable, while the use of privileged information only during data generation is a practical design choice. If the central claim were firmly established, the framework would offer a scalable approach to diversifying dexterous grasping data, and the paper includes a controlled real-hardware comparison across real-only, sim-only, and mixed training. However, the evidence base is thin: each object is evaluated over only five trials, no error bars or statistical tests are provided, the reported OOD success rate for the real-only policy is internally inconsistent, and the paper does not establish that the OOD test objects actually lie outside the simulated shape distribution. The empirical claims are therefore currently stronger than the experiments support.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV-D, Table I] The text states that the real-only policy "also generalizes to one of the unseen objects, resulting in a 40% success rate on out-of-distribution cases," but Table I reports Total (OOD) = 1/10 (10%). With only one successful OOD trial and five trials per object, the key comparison between real-only and mixed policies rests on a single observation and is not supported by any statistical test. Please correct the inconsistency and provide confidence intervals or additional trials.
  2. [Section IV-B, Section IV-D, Fig. 6] The claim that the green and blue boxes are out-of-distribution with respect to the simulated geometry is not established. The object parameterization samples a1 and a2 uniformly between 2–5 cm, a3 between 5–10 cm, and epsilon1,epsilon2 between epsilon_min and 2.0, so box-like superquadrics with high epsilon values fall inside the training distribution if their dimensions lie within these ranges. The paper does not report the measured superquadric parameters of the test objects, so the experiments may only demonstrate interpolation within the sampled shape family under new colors and textures. Please report measured phi values for the test objects, or add test objects from genuinely disjoint shape classes.
  3. [Section IV-D, Table I; Section IV-B] The experimental design does not isolate the contribution of RL-generated geometric diversity. The mixed policy differs from the real-only policy by adding 4000 simulated trajectories that include randomized lighting, camera pose, object pose, and surface textures in addition to shape variation, so the observed OOD improvement could be due to visual and domain randomization rather than the proposed RL-based shape adaptation. An ablation that generates simulated data with object-pose and visual randomization but without the RL residual policy or shape variation (for example, replaying the real demonstrations in simulation) is needed to attribute the gain to the proposed mechanism.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section IV-D, Training Variants] The word "simuilator" is a typo and should read "simulator."
  2. [Section III-D] The paper does not report the simulation success rate of the RL-generated trajectories, even though Section III-D states that trajectories are added to the dataset only when a success condition is met; reporting this rate would help the reader assess the efficiency and quality of the data-generation pipeline.
  3. [Section IV-B] The distribution p(z) is estimated from the same real demonstrations used for the in-distribution test, so the evaluation partially aligns the training prior with the test condition; this alignment should be stated explicitly when interpreting the ID results.
  4. [Abstract and Section I] The spacing in "V A models" is inconsistent with the standard notation "VA models" and should be fixed throughout the manuscript.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central result is an empirical comparison on held-out real objects, not a quantity derived from its own inputs.

full rationale

The paper's claim is that mixing RL-generated simulated trajectories with 40 real demonstrations yields a vision-based policy that generalizes to held-out objects. This is established by Table I through real-world trials on objects not used to train the policy. The simulation distribution p(phi) is specified heuristically, and p(z) is estimated from the real demonstrations; however, the mixed policy also trains on those demonstrations, and the OOD objects are not used to estimate p(z) or to fit any parameter that is then called a prediction. There is no equation in which the output quantity is defined in terms of the claimed result, no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no author-invoked uniqueness theorem that forces the choice of architecture. The self-citations ([19], [40]) supply a grasp database and an RL training setting; they are implementation details rather than load-bearing justifications of generalization. The reasonable concern that the 'out-of-distribution' boxes may fall within the sampled superquadric range (a1,a2 in 2-5 cm, a3 in 5-10 cm) is a claim-support and experimental-design issue, not circularity: the success rates are measured empirically, not derived from the training distribution. Under the strict definitions used here, no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The method introduces several hand-chosen sampling distributions for object shape and skill parameters, and the RL reward function weights are not reported; these are free parameters that the central claim depends on.

free parameters (6)
  • Object scale parameter ranges = a1,a2 uniformly sampled from 2-5 cm; a3 from 5-10 cm
    Chosen by hand to reflect expected object sizes; the central claim of generalization depends on these ranges covering the test objects.
  • Superquadric shape exponent range = epsilon1, epsilon2 uniformly sampled from epsilon_min to 2.0
    Hand-chosen range for shape variation; affects diversity of generated geometries.
  • Skill parameter distribution = approach direction uniform around 80 degrees plus or minus 10 degrees
    Estimated from real demonstrations; this alignment between simulated and real data is a hand-tuned choice that influences the mixing benefit.
  • Reward weights for r_dist, r_force, r_pick = not reported
    The reward function composition is defined but weights are not given; they are free parameters that shape the RL policy and therefore the generated data.
  • Number of simulated trajectories = 4000
    Hand-chosen dataset size for the mixed and sim-only conditions; the ratio of simulated to real data is a free parameter.
  • Lift height threshold for success = not specified
    The success condition for the pick reward and trajectory filtering depends on an unspecified height threshold, a free parameter.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Superquadrics can represent the object shapes of interest with sufficient fidelity for grasp synthesis.
    The object parameterization p(phi) is limited to superquadrics (Section III-C); real objects are convex boxes, but more complex geometries are not covered.
  • domain assumption ContactWeb provides valid contact points for grasp pose estimation across the sampled object shapes.
    The reference grasp pose is computed using ContactWeb (Section IV-B); the quality of the generated data depends on this external model.
  • domain assumption The residual RL policy's simulated trajectories are physically plausible and realizable on the real robot.
    The simulated trajectories are used as demonstrations for the real-world policy, but no direct sim-to-real validation of the RL policy's outputs is performed (Section IV-D).
  • domain assumption The simulation success condition (lifting without slippage) corresponds to real-world task success.
    Trajectories are filtered by a simulation success condition (Section III-D); mismatch with real physics would degrade the quality of the training data.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of RL-Driven Data Generation for Robust Vision-Based Dexterous Grasping." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AWS24JUB

@misc{pith2026250418084,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: RL-Driven Data Generation for Robust Vision-Based Dexterous Grasping},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AWS24JUB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.18084}
}
read the original abstract

This work presents reinforcement learning (RL)-driven data augmentation to improve the generalization of vision-action (VA) models for dexterous grasping. While real-to-sim-to-real frameworks, where a few real demonstrations seed large-scale simulated data, have proven effective for VA models, applying them to dexterous settings remains challenging: obtaining stable multi-finger contacts is nontrivial across diverse object shapes. To address this, we leverage RL to generate contact-rich grasping data across varied geometries. In line with the real-to-sim-to-real paradigm, the grasp skill is formulated as a parameterized and tunable reference trajectory refined by a residual policy learned via RL. This modular design enables trajectory-level control that is both consistent with real demonstrations and adaptable to diverse object geometries. A vision-conditioned policy trained on simulation-augmented data demonstrates strong generalization to unseen objects, highlighting the potential of our approach to alleviate the data bottleneck in training VA models.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.18084 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of the RL-driven data collection framework. Grasping trajectories are generated by executing a parameterized grasp skill in simulation. The skill uses a residual RL policy trained with privileged information and is conditioned on a skill parameter z (e.g., approach direction). The simulated environment includes a single object, parameterized by ϕ. Both z and ϕ, along with other simulation factors (e.g., cam… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Visualization of object shape variation by sweeping the superquadric parameter ε2 from a small positive value to 2.0. Each shape is rendered with the same scale, and all other parameters are fixed. This illustrates how geometric smoothness and edge sharpness change as ε2 increases. where the shape parameters ϕ = {a1, a2, a3, ϵ1, ϵ2} define the object’s scale along each axis and the degree of curvature or squareness … view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Example simulated grasp outcomes generated by our frame￾work across diverse object shapes, used as training data for vision￾based policies. The reference trajectory at time step t is then computed by interpolating between the two poses: ξt(z, o) = interpolate(x0, xg;t/T), where T denotes the predefined total number of timesteps for the trajectory. Grasp pose is estimated via desired finger-tip pose from ContactWeb [… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Objects used for real-world evaluation. The in-distribution object (left) corresponds to the one used for collecting real-world demonstrations. The remaining out-of-distribution objects (right) differ in shape, size, or color and are used to test generalization. For th…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Qualitative comparison of real-world grasping results for different training settings. The sim-only policy fails to execute successful grasps, while the real-only policy performs well on seen objects but struggles to generalize. Only the mixed policy, trained with both…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Compliant Sphere Lattice Contact: Distributed Contact Modeling for Sphere-Based Robot Representations

    cs.RO 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    CSLC models sphere-based robot surfaces as a spring lattice, producing distributed contact patches and restoring torque that point contact lacks.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

39 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Rt-2: Vision-language-action models transfer web knowledge to robotic control,

    A. Brohan et al. , “Rt-2: Vision-language-action models transfer web knowledge to robotic control,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.15818 , 2023

  2. [2]

    Vima: General robot manipulation with multimodal prompts,

    Y . Zhu et al. , “Vima: General robot manipulation with multimodal prompts,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.03094 , 2023

  3. [3]

    Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action diffusion,

    L. Chi, Y . Xu, S. Tellex, et al. , “Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action diffusion,” in Robotics: Science and Systems (RSS) , 2023

  4. [4]

    Graspdiff: Grasping generation for hand-object in- teraction with multimodal guided diffusion,

    H. Patel et al. , “Graspdiff: Grasping generation for hand-object in- teraction with multimodal guided diffusion,” in Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL) , 2023

  5. [5]

    Decomposing the generalization gap in imitation learning for visual robotic manipulation,

    A. Xie et al., “Decomposing the generalization gap in imitation learning for visual robotic manipulation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.03659, 2023

  6. [6]

    Resonant Electric Probe to Axionic Dark Matter

    K. Lee et al., “Vrb: A benchmark for visual representations in robotics,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2206.13543 , 2022

  7. [7]

    Robotdex: Benchmarking generalization of vision-based dexterous manipulation,

    J. Fu et al. , “Robotdex: Benchmarking generalization of vision-based dexterous manipulation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.10263 , 2023

  8. [9]

    Dexmv: Imitation learning for dexterous manipulation from human videos,

    M. Janner et al., “Dexmv: Imitation learning for dexterous manipulation from human videos,” in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , 2022

Show all 39 references
  1. [10]

    Mimicgen: A data generation system for scalable robot learning using human demonstrations,

    A. Mandlekar et al. , “Mimicgen: A data generation system for scalable robot learning using human demonstrations,” in Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL) , 2023

  2. [11]

    Dexmimicgen: Automated data generation for bimanual dexterous manipulation,

    Y . Liu et al. , “Dexmimicgen: Automated data generation for bimanual dexterous manipulation,” in IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , 2024

  3. [12]

    Learning complex dexterous manipulation with deep reinforcement learning and demonstrations,

    A. Rajeswaran et al. , “Learning complex dexterous manipulation with deep reinforcement learning and demonstrations,” in RSS, 2018

  4. [13]

    Learning dexterous in-hand manipulation,

    M. Andrychowicz et al., “Learning dexterous in-hand manipulation,” in IJRR, 2020

  5. [14]

    A system for general in-hand object re-orientation,

    Z. Chen et al. , “A system for general in-hand object re-orientation,” in ICRA, 2022

  6. [15]

    Privileged sensing scaffolds reinforcement learning,

    E. S. Hu et al. , “Privileged sensing scaffolds reinforcement learning,” International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) , 2024

  7. [16]

    Robot self-teaching with foundation models,

    X. Li et al., “Robot self-teaching with foundation models,” International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR) , 2023

  8. [17]

    Language-guided robot experience generation in simula- tion,

    D. Ha et al. , “Language-guided robot experience generation in simula- tion,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.07024 , 2023

  9. [18]

    Skillgen: Data generation for scalable robot learning with few human demonstrations,

    K. Lee et al., “Skillgen: Data generation for scalable robot learning with few human demonstrations,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.11549 , 2023

  10. [19]

    Toward automatic robot instruction from perception-mapping human grasps to manipulator grasps,

    S. B. Kang and K. Ikeuchi, “Toward automatic robot instruction from perception-mapping human grasps to manipulator grasps,” IEEE trans- actions on robotics and automation , vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 81–95, 1997

  11. [20]

    Meta-grasp: Learning to grasp novel objects via meta- learning,

    A. Gupta et al., “Meta-grasp: Learning to grasp novel objects via meta- learning,” in Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL) , 2022

  12. [21]

    Dexgraspnet: A large-scale robotic dexterous grasp dataset for general object grasping with dexterous hands,

    A. Sharma et al. , “Dexgraspnet: A large-scale robotic dexterous grasp dataset for general object grasping with dexterous hands,” in IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , 2023

  13. [22]

    Cliport: What and where pathways for robotic manipulation,

    M. Shridhar, L. Manuelli, and D. Fox, “Cliport: What and where pathways for robotic manipulation,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 1234–1241, 2023

  14. [23]

    Vima: General robot manipulation with multimodal prompts,

    Y . Zhu et al. , “Vima: General robot manipulation with multimodal prompts,” in International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), 2023

  15. [24]

    A generalist agent,

    S. Reed et al. , “A generalist agent,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.06175 , 2022

  16. [25]

    Palm-e: An embodied multimodal language model,

    D. Driess et al. , “Palm-e: An embodied multimodal language model,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 1234–1241, 2023

  17. [26]

    Open x-embodiment: Robotic learning datasets and policies at scale,

    D. Driess et al. , “Open x-embodiment: Robotic learning datasets and policies at scale,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03367 , 2023

  18. [27]

    Octo: An open-source generalist robot policy,

    D. Ghosh et al. , “Octo: An open-source generalist robot policy,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16686, 2023

  19. [28]

    Project gr00t: Nvidia’s generalist robot policy and data generation framework,

    N. Research, “Project gr00t: Nvidia’s generalist robot policy and data generation framework,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.14449 , 2024

  20. [29]

    Decomposing the generalization gap in imitation learning for visual robotic manipulation,

    A. Xie, L. Lee, T. Xiao, and C. Finn, “Decomposing the generalization gap in imitation learning for visual robotic manipulation,” in Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL) , 2023

  21. [30]

    Skillgen: Data generation for scalable robot learning with few human demonstrations,

    K. Lee et al., “Skillgen: Data generation for scalable robot learning with few human demonstrations,” IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , vol. 8, no. 2, pp. 1234–1241, 2023

  22. [31]

    Intervengen: Intervention-driven data generation for safe and reliable robot policies,

    A. Jain et al., “Intervengen: Intervention-driven data generation for safe and reliable robot policies,” in Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL) , 2023

  23. [32]

    Eureka: Human-level reward design via coding large language models,

    B. Huang et al. , “Eureka: Human-level reward design via coding large language models,” Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS), vol. 36, 2023

  24. [33]

    Genaug: Improving generalization of visual robotic policies via semantic augmentation,

    J. Yang et al. , “Genaug: Improving generalization of visual robotic policies via semantic augmentation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.07835 , 2023

  25. [34]

    Bridgedata v2: A dataset for robot learning at scale,

    F. Ebert et al., “Bridgedata v2: A dataset for robot learning at scale,” in Robotics: Science and Systems (RSS) , 2023

  26. [35]

    Se(3) diffusion fields: Learning smooth se(3) denoising for pose estimation,

    W. Ni et al. , “Se(3) diffusion fields: Learning smooth se(3) denoising for pose estimation,” in Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL) , 2023

  27. [36]

    Su- perdec: 3d scene decomposition with superquadric primitives,

    E. Fedele, B. Sun, L. Guibas, M. Pollefeys, and F. Engelmann, “Su- perdec: 3d scene decomposition with superquadric primitives,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.00992, 2025

  28. [37]

    Dexmimicgen: Automated data generation for bimanual dexterous manipulation,

    Y . Liu et al. , “Dexmimicgen: Automated data generation for bimanual dexterous manipulation,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24185 , 2024. 7

  29. [38]

    Prox- imal policy optimization algorithms,

    J. Schulman, F. Wolski, P. Dhariwal, A. Radford, and O. Klimov, “Prox- imal policy optimization algorithms,” arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347 , 2017

  30. [39]

    Isaac gym: High performance gpu-based physics simulation for robot learning,

    V . Makoviychuk, A. Wawrzyniak, A. Pashevich, A. Handa, Y . Zhang, D. Makoviychuk, G. State, P. Henry, J. Bohg, S. Nikolenko, et al. , “Isaac gym: High performance gpu-based physics simulation for robot learning,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.10470 , 2021

  31. [40]

    Task-grasping from a demonstrated human strategy,

    D. Saito, K. Sasabuchi, N. Wake, J. Takamatsu, H. Koike, and K. Ikeuchi, “Task-grasping from a demonstrated human strategy,” in 2022 IEEE-RAS 21st International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), pp. 880–887, 2022

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.