Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 49 references

Grasp What You Want: Embodied Dexterous Grasping System Driven by Your Voice

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read EDGS claims that a voice-driven robotic hand can grasp unseen objects in cluttered scenes by enriching the user's referring expression with a vision-language model and then filtering candidate grasps through force-closure and…

desk verdict A likeable, honest system-integration paper with real robot experiments; the VLM-supplied friction coefficient is the one load-bearing piece that needs validation before the headline success rate means what it claims. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.10694 v1 pith:4DWTPRYM submitted 2024-12-14 cs.RO

Junliang Li , Kai Ye , Haolan Kang , Mingxuan Liang , Yuhang Wu , Zhenhua Liu , Huiping Zhuang , Rui Huang
show 1 more author
Yongquan Chen
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.RO
keywords dexterousgraspingvoice-drivenroboticsreferringexpressionsegmentationvision-languagemodelsforceclosuregraspwrenchspaceclutteredsceneshuman-robotinteraction
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

EDGS is a modular robotic system that takes a spoken instruction, turns it into an enriched text description using a vision-language model, segments the named object in an RGB-D scene, and then plans a multi-fingered grasp on the segmented point cloud. The paper's claim is that this combination lets a single robotic arm with a dexterous hand handle cluttered, unstructured scenes without CAD models or per-object training. A sympathetic reading of the experiments is that the system works: the authors report 95.5% object-by-object grasping success, outperforming comparison methods, and 96.1% success across fruit, household, and vegetable cluttered-application trials. The contribution is both perceptual, by enriching referring expressions to reduce ambiguity, and physical, through a human-inspired skeleton-guided grasp candidate generator followed by force-closure and grasp-wrench-space refinement.

What carries the argument

The system is carried by three coupled modules. RERE is the perceptual engine: a vision-language model aligns the user's referring expression with the image and expands it along instance category, color, shape, material, and position, reducing semantic ambiguity before segmentation. DGCG is the candidate generator: it thins the segmented object to a skeleton, computes a characteristic centroid and feature vector, intersects the hand's truncated-spline finger workspaces with the object surface, aligns a thumb-object pinching axis with the feature vector, and samples grasp candidates from a Gaussian whose covariance is scaled by the affordance score. DGR is the physical filter: it keeps only grasps satisfying force closure using a friction coefficient mu returned by the vision-language model, ranks the survivors by the radius of the smallest enclosing sphere of the grasp wrench space convex hull, and picks the lowest-cost motion among the top three.

What would settle it

A concrete check: run EDGS on the same eleven-object and object-by-object setups while perturbing the VLM-returned $\mu$ by fixed factors such as 0.5x and 2x, or replacing it with measured friction values, and compare success rates; if the 95.5% rate survives across large $\mu$ perturbations, the filter is insensitive to friction, whereas if success drops sharply or tracks the true value, the claim needs friction calibration. A complementary check is to place unseen low-friction or reflective objects in the same cluttered arrangements and record per-category failures.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

EDGS claims to close the loop from voice to dexterous action in cluttered scenes by making the language side and the grasp side work together. The RERE step enriches a vague user description with category, color, shape, material, texture, and position cues drawn from the image, so off-the-shelf segmentation models produce cleaner masks; on the GraspNet benchmark the authors report mIoU gains of 5.0 to 25.7 points. The grasp side extracts a skeleton-based feature vector, models finger workspaces as truncated splines, aligns a thumb-finger pinching axis to the object feature vector, samples grasp candidates in a Gaussian whose covariance is set by a vision-language-model affordance, then filters by force closure, ranks by grasp wrench space, and selects the lowest-motion inverse-kinematics solution. On the authors' real-world platform, this pipeline reached 95.5% success in the object-by-object comparison protocol and 96.1% overall across the three application categories.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the friction coefficient $\mu$ delivered by the vision-language model in Eq. (6) is accurate enough for force-closure filtering; the paper does not independently validate these estimates, so a systematic misjudgment of surface friction would let physically infeasible contacts pass the filter and would likely reduce the reported success rates on new objects or materials.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Voice-driven operation becomes feasible for cluttered household or warehouse scenes without per-object CAD models or target-specific training.
  • Enriched referring expressions can be plugged into existing segmentation models, lifting their mask quality on cluttered scenes by a double-digit mIoU margin, which should help other language-to-action robotic systems.
  • The skeleton-plus-workspace sampling and force-closure/grasp-wrench-space refinement offer a parameter-light alternative to learned grasp generation for dexterous hands, with a claimed 95.5% real-world success rate.
  • A full system that chains speech, vision-language enrichment, segmentation, and analytic grasp filtering can be assembled from off-the-shelf components, making embodied voice control a modular rather than monolithic engineering problem.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editor inference: the VLM-returned friction coefficient in the force-closure step is unvalidated, so the system's transfer to new materials is the least protected part of the pipeline; testing with calibrated friction values or adding tactile slip detection would reveal how much of the claimed 95.5% depends on that estimate.
  • Editor inference: RERE and the DGCG/DGR grasp policy are decoupled in the architecture, so each could be reused independently; RERE could improve any referring-expression segmenter, while skeleton-guided candidates could seed learning-based policies with physically plausible starting poses.
  • Editor inference: the paper's own limitations list, including no haptic sensing, limited hand degrees of freedom, and single-arm force-closure limits on large objects, suggests that adding tactile feedback or bimanual coordination is the natural next step before voice-driven dexterous grasping generalizes to larger everyday objects.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes EDGS, a voice-command-driven dexterous grasping system for cluttered scenes. The pipeline consists of three modules: RERE, which enriches a user's referring expression using vision-language-model-derived visual attributes; DGCG, which samples grasp candidates from a segmented point cloud using a skeleton-based object feature and a hand-workspace model; and DGR, which filters candidates by force closure and grasp-wrench-space quality and selects a final grasp by motion cost. The paper reports improved referring-expression segmentation on GraspNet with three segmentation models, real-world single-object grasping success rates on eleven objects, a 95.5% success rate in an object-by-object grasping task, and roughly 96% success in three cluttered application scenarios, comparing favorably with several recent baselines.

Significance. If the quantitative claims are reproducible, EDGS would be a useful integration of VLM-based instruction enrichment with analytical dexterous grasp planning, with real-hardware evidence and no dependency on pre-scanned CAD models. The modular design and the RERE enrichment idea are plausible and potentially transferable. However, the empirical support is currently weakened by the absence of validation for the VLM-estimated friction coefficient, by missing protocol details in the segmentation and grasping experiments, and by the lack of released code or uncertainty quantification. The central claim of high and robust success rates therefore remains conditional pending those validations.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.3, Eqs. (6), (8), (9)] The friction coefficient mu is load-bearing for the grasp refinement pipeline: Eq. 6 uses a friction coefficient "returned by vision language model," while Section 3.3 says mu_i is derived from ground-truth values in a priori tables informed by VLM texture classification, and these two descriptions are mutually inconsistent. The paper provides no validation of these mu estimates against measured friction and no ablation that replaces the VLM-derived mu with the known ground-truth mu for the test objects. Because Eq. 8's force-closure condition and Eq. 9's GWS ranking both use the friction cone boundary set by mu, an overestimated mu can admit contacts that slip during execution and an underestimated mu can discard feasible grasps, so the reported 95.5% success rate is not demonstrated to transfer to unseen materials. Section 5's limitation discussion also does not mention this uncertainty, even though the paper itself identifies it as a relevant failure mode for delicate handling.
  2. [Section 4.2, Table 1] The GraspNet segmentation experiment never states where the raw captions come from: whether they are the dataset's original annotations, generated by an LLM from the images, or manually written by the authors. Without this information, the mIoU gains in Table 1 cannot be attributed to RERE rather than to the source of the captions or to the prompt design. The experiment also reports a single mIoU number per configuration with no variance across scenes or runs, so the claimed improvements of 5.0 to 25.7 points are not established with any statistical significance.
  3. [Section 4.3, Tables 3 and 4] The grasping comparisons are not shown to be apples-to-apples: the paper does not state whether ISAGrasp, DexDiffuser, Matak, DextrAH-G, HGCNet, GraspTTA, and DexGraspNet 2.0 were executed on the same UR5/Inspire platform, with the same object set, the same number of trials, and the same success criterion, or whether the numbers are quoted from the original papers. Table 3 also contains an internal inconsistency: the text says EDGS achieves an 87.5% success rate on the Wooden Block and Tape, while the table reports 100% for both objects. The absence of error bars and trial counts for all methods makes the difference between 95.5% and 90.7% in Table 4 impossible to assess statistically.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (7)] The notation |Σ| = (1/Ko) × I is dimensionally inconsistent as written, because a determinant is a scalar and the right-hand side is a matrix; please clarify whether Σ itself is scaled by 1/Ko or whether the covariance is intended differently.
  2. [Abstract and Section 4.2] The acronym RERE is expanded inconsistently as "Referring Expression Representation Enrichment" in the abstract and contributions and as "Refined Enriched Representation Enhancement" in Section 4.2; please unify the terminology.
  3. [Table 2] The first column of Table 2 is labeled "GraspNet [14]" even though the reported values are all Grounded SAM IoU scores; relabeling the column as "Grounded SAM IoU" would avoid implying that the ablation covers all three segmentation models.
  4. [Figure 2 and Eq. (6)] Figure 2 refers to a "GPT-aided module" for friction estimation while the text refers to a "vision language model" and Section 3.3 refers to a priori tables; please specify exactly which VLM is used and which a priori table is consulted.
  5. [Section 3.3, Eq. (10)] The symbol p_i in Eq. (10) is not explicitly defined at first use; from context it appears to be a grasp candidate in R^12, but it should be defined along with q_i before being used in the quality set Q.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: EDGS is an empirical systems integration whose components are standard external methods, and the VLM-estimated friction coefficient is an unvalidated input, not a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

I walked the derivation chain: RERE enriches the text with visual features and then feeds the enriched text to segmentation models; this is the method itself, not a tautology, and the improvement is measured against ground-truth masks, so it is not a self-definitional reduction. DGCG samples grasp candidates from geometry and hand workspace; DGR filters using standard force-closure (Eq. 8) and GWS (Eq. 9) criteria taken from external prior work ([33], [6]), not from the authors' own theorems. The only load-bearing quantity estimated from a model is the friction coefficient mu in Eq. 6 and Section 3.3, where 'mu_i is derived from ground truth values in a priori tables, informed by texture classification through VLM'; this is a correctness risk because the VLM estimate is not validated against measured friction and could bias the force-closure filter, but it is an input parameter, not a value fitted to the reported 95.5% success rate, and no equation defines the success rate as a function of mu in a way that would make the result true by construction. There are no author self-citations or imported uniqueness theorems; the comparison numbers in Tables 3-5 are bench measurements, not derivations. Sections 4.2 and 5 explicitly acknowledge segmentation failures and system limitations such as clutter, lack of haptics, limited DoF, and single-arm force-closure; these are honest scope statements and do not themselves create circularity. Overall, the reported results are empirical claims about an integrated system, not consequences of definitions or fitted parameters disguised as predictions.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests primarily on domain assumptions about contact modeling and on unstated implementation choices. No new physical entities are introduced. The free parameters are not fitted to data in the paper, but they are also not reported, which makes the method hard to reproduce.

free parameters (3)
  • RERE feature weights wC, wS, wM, wP = not reported
    Eq. 1 defines weights for color, shape, material, and position in composing the enriched text. They are not learned or specified in the paper, so the enrichment depends on hand-tuned or arbitrary values.
  • Audio energy threshold = not reported
    Section 3.1 uses signal energy E(t) to trigger and stop audio capture. No calibration value or adaptive rule is given, making the voice-command intake hard to reproduce exactly.
  • Grasp candidate count N = not reported
    Section 3.2 samples a set {Mi}_N of grasp poses, but N and the Gaussian sampling parameters are unspecified. The candidate count influences both success rate and computation time.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Skeleton lines extracted by the thinning algorithm capture the object's morphological orientation for grasp planning.
    Section 3.2 bases the object feature vector on the 2D skeleton and PCA. If the skeleton does not align with a functional grasping axis, the sampled candidates would be biased.
  • ad hoc to paper The hand workspace is adequately modeled by truncated splines for the four fingers and a planar workspace for the thumb.
    Eqs. 4 and 5 replace the Inspire hand's kinematic structure with simplified splines. The paper does not quantify the modeling error.
  • domain assumption Force closure and Grasp Wrench Space analysis predict real-world grasp success.
    Section 3.3 uses these standard criteria to filter candidates, assuming static frictional contact models transfer to the physical hand and objects.
  • ad hoc to paper The vision-language model's friction coefficient estimate mu is accurate enough for force-closure filtering.
    Eq. 6 and Section 3.3 rely on mu from a VLM. No validation of these estimates is reported, yet they determine which grasps pass filtering.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Grasp What You Want: Embodied Dexterous Grasping System Driven by Your Voice." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4DWTPRYM

@misc{pith2026241210694,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Grasp What You Want: Embodied Dexterous Grasping System Driven by Your Voice},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4DWTPRYM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.10694}
}
read the original abstract

In recent years, as robotics has advanced, human-robot collaboration has gained increasing importance. However, current robots struggle to fully and accurately interpret human intentions from voice commands alone. Traditional gripper and suction systems often fail to interact naturally with humans, lack advanced manipulation capabilities, and are not adaptable to diverse tasks, especially in unstructured environments. This paper introduces the Embodied Dexterous Grasping System (EDGS), designed to tackle object grasping in cluttered environments for human-robot interaction. We propose a novel approach to semantic-object alignment using a Vision-Language Model (VLM) that fuses voice commands and visual information, significantly enhancing the alignment of multi-dimensional attributes of target objects in complex scenarios. Inspired by human hand-object interactions, we develop a robust, precise, and efficient grasping strategy, incorporating principles like the thumb-object axis, multi-finger wrapping, and fingertip interaction with an object's contact mechanics. We also design experiments to assess Referring Expression Representation Enrichment (RERE) in referring expression segmentation, demonstrating that our system accurately detects and matches referring expressions. Extensive experiments confirm that EDGS can effectively handle complex grasping tasks, achieving stability and high success rates, highlighting its potential for further development in the field of Embodied AI.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.10694 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of Our Method. The system processes natural language instructions via a speech recognition module and RGB-D scene data with a vision-language model to generate a r ich object description. A segmentation model isolates the target object, creating a segmented point cloud. The policy generation module then computes grasp strategies, executed by a robotic arm with proprioceptive feedback for precise manipulatio… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Grasp Policy Generation Method. Our method starts with segmented point cloud for feature extraction, followed by constrained sampling and contact point estimation. Parameter (Ko) related to constrained sampling is determined by grasp affordance assessment. A GPT-aided module estimates the friction coefficient (µ) for force closure filtering, and the grasp action sets are refined through GWS quality assessment to det… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overview of the Experimental Setup. 4.2. Instruction semantic enrichment experiment We conduct a series of comprehensive experiments to evaluate the effectiveness of our RERE (Refined Enriched Representation Enhancement) method in improving seman￾tic segmentation performance across several widely-used benchmarks. Specifically, we apply the RERE technique to the GraspNet-1Billion dataset [14], leveraging three distin… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Segmentation Error Analysis in Grasping Scenarios: Comparison of Results with and without RERE. This figure shows four common segmentation errors in grasping tasks: (a) Class confusion, (b) Boundary inaccuracies, (c) Object merging, and (d) False negatives. proach and …
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Grasping Scenarios for Eleven Objects. Experimental setups showing the system’s performance across diverse objects. Method Pringles Roll Tape Cleaner Airplane Sprayer Mustard Bottle Spam Wooden Block Pitcher Cup ISAGrasp [10] 60% 80% 80% - - - - - - - - DexDiffuser [42…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Application Scenarios of Voice-Commanded Dexterous Grasping. Experimental setups illustrating the system’s performance in cluttered environments: (a) Fruits; (b) Household Items; (c) Vegetables. These scenarios highlight the challenges and versatility of the EDGS acros…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Gpt-4 technical report

    Josh Achiam, Steven Adler, Sandhini Agarwal, Lama Ahmad, Ilge Akkaya, Florencia Leoni Aleman, Diogo Almeida, Janko Altenschmidt, Sam Altman, Shyamal Anadkat, et al. Gpt-4 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.08774, 2023. 2

    arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    Multimodal machine learning: A survey and tax- onomy

    Tadas Baltrušaitis, Chaitanya Ahuja, and Louis-Philippe Morency. Multimodal machine learning: A survey and tax- onomy. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 41(2):423–443, 2018. 3, 5

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    Betti, U

    S. Betti, U. Castiello, and C. Begliomini. Reach-to-grasp: A multisensory experience. Frontiers in Psychology, 12:614471, Feb 2021. 5

    work page 2021

  4. [4]

    A transformation for extracting new descriptions of shape

    Harry Blum. A transformation for extracting new descriptions of shape. Models for the perception of speech and visual form, pages 362–380, 1967. 5

    work page 1967

  5. [5]

    Hand aperture patterns in prehension

    Raoul M Bongers, Frank TJM Zaal, and Marc Jeannerod. Hand aperture patterns in prehension. Human movement science, 31(3):487–501, 2012. 5

    work page 2012

  6. [6]

    Borst, M

    Ch. Borst, M. Fischer, and G. Hirzinger. Grasp planning: how to choose a suitable task wrench space. In IEEE International 12 Conference on Robotics and Automation, 2004. Proceedings. ICRA ’04. 2004, volume 1, pages 319–325 V ol.1, 2004. 2, 7

    work page 2004

  7. [7]

    Uncertainty-aware suction grasping for cluttered scenes

    Rui Cao, Biqi Yang, Yichuan Li, Chi-Wing Fu, Pheng-Ann Heng, and Yun-Hui Liu. Uncertainty-aware suction grasping for cluttered scenes. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 9(6):4934–4941, 2024. 1, 3

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Casas, Nikita Khargonkar, Balakrishnan Prabhakaran, and Yichen Xiang

    Luis F. Casas, Nikita Khargonkar, Balakrishnan Prabhakaran, and Yichen Xiang. Multigrippergrasp: A dataset for robotic grasping from parallel jaw grippers to dexterous hands, Aug

    work page

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    Task- oriented dexterous grasp synthesis via differentiable grasp wrench boundary estimator

    Jiayi Chen, Yuxing Chen, Jialiang Zhang, and He Wang. Task- oriented dexterous grasp synthesis via differentiable grasp wrench boundary estimator. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.13586,

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    Learning ro- bust real-world dexterous grasping policies via implicit shape augmentation

    Zoey Chen, Karl Van Wyk, Yu-Wei Chao, Wei Yang, Arsalan Mousavian, Abhishek Gupta, and Dieter Fox. Learning ro- bust real-world dexterous grasping policies via implicit shape augmentation. ArXiv, abs/2210.13638, 2022. 10

    2022 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Human grasp choice and robotic grasp analysis

    Mark R Cutkosky and Robert D Howe. Human grasp choice and robotic grasp analysis. Dextrous robot hands, pages 5–31,

  4. [12]

    Open6dor: Benchmarking open-instruction 6-dof object rearrangement and a vlm-based approach

    Yufei Ding, Haoran Geng, Chaoyi Xu, Xiaomeng Fang, Ji- azhao Zhang, Songlin Wei, Qiyu Dai, Zhizheng Zhang, and He Wang. Open6dor: Benchmarking open-instruction 6-dof object rearrangement and a vlm-based approach. In First Vision and Language for Autonomous Driving and Robotics...

  5. [13]

    Anygrasp: Robust and efficient grasp perception in spa- tial and temporal domains

    Hao-Shu Fang, Chenxi Wang, Hongjie Fang, Minghao Gou, Jirong Liu, Hengxu Yan, Wenhai Liu, Yichen Xie, and Cewu Lu. Anygrasp: Robust and efficient grasp perception in spa- tial and temporal domains. IEEE Transactions on Robotics, 39(5):3929–3945, 2023. 3

    2023

  6. [14]

    Graspnet-1billion: A large-scale benchmark for general object grasping

    Hao-Shu Fang, Chenxi Wang, Minghao Gou, and Cewu Lu. Graspnet-1billion: A large-scale benchmark for general object grasping. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 11444–11453,

  7. [15]

    Gra- dient response maps for real-time detection of textureless objects

    Stefan Hinterstoisser, Cedric Cagniart, Slobodan Ilic, Peter Sturm, Nassir Navab, Pascal Fua, and Vincent Lepetit. Gra- dient response maps for real-time detection of textureless objects. IEEE transactions on pattern analysis and machine intelligence, 34(5):876–888, 2011. 1

    2011

  8. [16]

    Consolidation of unorganized point clouds for surface reconstruction

    Hui Huang, Dan Li, Hao Zhang, Uri Ascher, and Daniel Cohen-Or. Consolidation of unorganized point clouds for surface reconstruction. ACM Trans. Graph., 28(5):1–7, Dec

  9. [17]

    Rekep: Spatio-temporal reasoning of relational keypoint constraints for robotic manipulation

    Wenlong Huang, Chen Wang, Yunzhu Li, Ruohan Zhang, and Li Fei-Fei. Rekep: Spatio-temporal reasoning of relational keypoint constraints for robotic manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.01652, 2024. 1

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Hand-object contact consistency reasoning for hu- man grasps generation

    Hanwen Jiang, Shaowei Liu, Jiashun Wang, and Xiaolong Wang. Hand-object contact consistency reasoning for hu- man grasps generation. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Computer Vision, 2021. 10

    2021

  11. [19]

    Robotic perception of object prop- erties using tactile sensing

    Jiaqi Jiang and Shan Luo. Robotic perception of object prop- erties using tactile sensing. CoRR, abs/2112.14119, 2021. 7

    2021 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Text4seg: Reimagining image segmentation as text genera- tion, 2024

    Mengcheng Lan, Chaofeng Chen, Yue Zhou, Jiaxing Xu, Yiping Ke, Xinjiang Wang, Litong Feng, and Wayne Zhang. Text4seg: Reimagining image segmentation as text genera- tion, 2024. 3

    2024

  13. [21]

    Shapegrasp: Zero-shot task-oriented grasping with large language models through geometric decomposition, 2024

    Samuel Li, Sarthak Bhagat, Joseph Campbell, Yaqi Xie, Woo- jun Kim, Katia Sycara, and Simon Stepputtis. Shapegrasp: Zero-shot task-oriented grasping with large language models through geometric decomposition, 2024. 3

    2024

  14. [22]

    Geometric shape reasoning for zero-shot task-oriented grasping

    Samuel Li, Sarthak Bhagat, Joseph Campbell, Yaqi Xie, Woo- jun Kim, Katia P Sycara, and Simon Stepputtis. Geometric shape reasoning for zero-shot task-oriented grasping. In ICRA 2024 Workshop on 3D Visual Representations for Robot Ma- nipulation. 1

    2024

  15. [23]

    Hgc-net: Deep anthropomorphic hand grasping in clutter

    Yiming Li, Wei Wei, Daheng Li, Peng Wang, Wanyi Li, and Jun Zhong. Hgc-net: Deep anthropomorphic hand grasping in clutter. In 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 714–720, 2022. 10

    2022

  16. [24]

    Sam-6d: Segment anything model meets zero-shot 6d object pose esti- mation

    Jiehong Lin, Lihua Liu, Dekun Lu, and Kui Jia. Sam-6d: Segment anything model meets zero-shot 6d object pose esti- mation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Com- puter Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 27906–27916,

  17. [25]

    GRES: Gen- eralized referring expression segmentation

    Chang Liu, Henghui Ding, and Xudong Jiang. GRES: Gen- eralized referring expression segmentation. In CVPR, 2023. 3

    2023

  18. [26]

    Self-corrected multimodal large language model for end-to-end robot manipulation

    Jiaming Liu, Chenxuan Li, Guanqun Wang, Lily Lee, Kaichen Zhou, Sixiang Chen, Chuyan Xiong, Jiaxin Ge, Renrui Zhang, and Shanghang Zhang. Self-corrected multimodal large language model for end-to-end robot manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.17418, 2024. 3

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Evalu- ation and enhancement of semantic grounding in large vision- language models

    Jiaying Lu, Jinmeng Rao, Kezhen Chen, Xiaoyuan Guo, Yawen Zhang, Baochen Sun, Carl Yang, and Jie Yang. Evalu- ation and enhancement of semantic grounding in large vision- language models. In AAAI-ReLM Workshop, 2024. 4

    2024

  20. [28]

    Dextrah-g: Pixels-to-action dexter- ous arm-hand grasping with geometric fabrics

    Tyler Ga Wei Lum, Martin Matak, Viktor Makoviychuk, Ankur Handa, Arthur Allshire, Tucker Hermans, Nathan D Ratliff, and Karl Van Wyk. Dextrah-g: Pixels-to-action dexter- ous arm-hand grasping with geometric fabrics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.02274, 2024. 1, 3, 10

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Learning dexter- ous grasping with object-centric visual affordances

    Priyanka Mandikal and Kristen Grauman. Learning dexter- ous grasping with object-centric visual affordances. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 6169–6176, 2021. 3

    2021

  22. [30]

    Planning visual-tactile precision grasps via complementary use of vision and touch

    Martin Matak and Tucker Hermans. Planning visual-tactile precision grasps via complementary use of vision and touch. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 8(2):768–775, 2023. 10

    2023

  23. [31]

    Grasp anything: Combin- ing teacher-augmented policy gradient learning with instance segmentation to grasp arbitrary objects

    Malte Mosbach and Sven Behnke. Grasp anything: Combin- ing teacher-augmented policy gradient learning with instance segmentation to grasp arbitrary objects. In IEEE Interna- tional Conference on Robotics and Automation, ICRA 2024, Yokohama, Japan, May 13-17, 2024, pages 7515–7...

    2024

  24. [32]

    Multimodal deep learn- ing

    Jiquan Ngiam, Aditya Khosla, Mingyu Kim, Juhan Nam, Honglak Lee, and Andrew Y Ng. Multimodal deep learn- ing. In Proceedings of the 28th international conference on machine learning (ICML-11), pages 689–696, 2011. 3, 5 13

    2011

  25. [33]

    V .-D. Nguyen. Constructing force-closure grasps. InProceed- ings. 1986 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation, volume 3, pages 1368–1373, 1986. 7

    1986

  26. [34]

    Grounded sam: Assembling open-world models for diverse visual tasks

    Tianhe Ren, Shilong Liu, Ailing Zeng, Jing Lin, Kunchang Li, He Cao, Jiayu Chen, Xinyu Huang, Yukang Chen, Feng Yan, et al. Grounded sam: Assembling open-world models for diverse visual tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.14159,

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    Graspgpt: Leveraging semantic knowledge from a large language model for task-oriented grasping

    Chao Tang, Dehao Huang, Wenqi Ge, Weiyu Liu, and Hong Zhang. Graspgpt: Leveraging semantic knowledge from a large language model for task-oriented grasping. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 8(11):7551–7558, 2023. 3

    2023

  28. [36]

    Grasp pose detection in point clouds, 2017

    Andreas ten Pas, Marcus Gualtieri, Kate Saenko, and Robert Platt. Grasp pose detection in point clouds, 2017. 3

    2017

  29. [37]

    Umberger and Ross H

    Brian R. Umberger and Ross H. Miller. Optimal control modeling of human movement. In Bertram Müller and Sebas- tian Wolf, editors, Handbook of Human Motion, pages 1–22. Springer, 2017. 7

    2017

  30. [38]

    Grasp- anything: Large-scale grasp dataset from foundation models,

    An Dinh Vuong, Minh Nhat Vu, Hieu Le, Baoru Huang, Binh Huynh, Thieu V o, Andreas Kugi, and Anh Nguyen. Grasp- anything: Large-scale grasp dataset from foundation models,

  31. [39]

    Unidexgrasp++: Improving dexter- ous grasping policy learning via geometry-aware curriculum and iterative generalist-specialist learning

    Weikang Wan, Haoran Geng, Yun Liu, Zikang Shan, Yaodong Yang, Li Yi, and He Wang. Unidexgrasp++: Improving dexter- ous grasping policy learning via geometry-aware curriculum and iterative generalist-specialist learning. In2023 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Visi...

    2023

  32. [40]

    Neural attention field: Emerging point relevance in 3d scenes for one-shot dexterous grasping, 2024

    Qianxu Wang, Congyue Deng, Tyler Ga Wei Lum, Yuan- pei Chen, Yaodong Yang, Jeannette Bohg, Yixin Zhu, and Leonidas Guibas. Neural attention field: Emerging point relevance in 3d scenes for one-shot dexterous grasping, 2024. 3

    2024

  33. [41]

    Dexgraspnet: A large- scale robotic dexterous grasp dataset for general objects based on simulation, 2023

    Ruicheng Wang, Jialiang Zhang, Jiayi Chen, Yinzhen Xu, Puhao Li, Tengyu Liu, and He Wang. Dexgraspnet: A large- scale robotic dexterous grasp dataset for general objects based on simulation, 2023. 3

    2023

  34. [42]

    Dexdiffuser: Generating dexterous grasps with diffusion mod- els, 2024

    Zehang Weng, Haofei Lu, Danica Kragic, and Jens Lundell. Dexdiffuser: Generating dexterous grasps with diffusion mod- els, 2024. 10

    2024

  35. [43]

    Florence-2: Advancing a unified representation for a variety of vision tasks

    Bin Xiao, Haiping Wu, Weijian Xu, Xiyang Dai, Houdong Hu, Yumao Lu, Michael Zeng, Ce Liu, and Lu Yuan. Florence-2: Advancing a unified representation for a variety of vision tasks. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Com- puter Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 48...

    2024

  36. [44]

    Unidex- grasp: Universal robotic dexterous grasping via learning di- verse proposal generation and goal-conditioned policy

    Yinzhen Xu, Weikang Wan, Jialiang Zhang, Haoran Liu, Zikang Shan, Hao Shen, Ruicheng Wang, Haoran Geng, Yijia Weng, Jiayi Chen, Tengyu Liu, Li Yi, and He Wang. Unidex- grasp: Universal robotic dexterous grasping via learning di- verse proposal generation and goal-conditioned p...

    2023

  37. [45]

    Lavt: Language-aware vision transformer for referring image segmentation

    Zhao Yang, Jiaqi Wang, Yansong Tang, Kai Chen, Heng- shuang Zhao, and Philip HS Torr. Lavt: Language-aware vision transformer for referring image segmentation. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 18155–18165, 2022. 3

    2022

  38. [46]

    Dexgraspnet 2.0: Learning generative dexterous grasping in large-scale synthetic cluttered scenes

    Jialiang Zhang, Haoran Liu, Danshi Li, Xinqiang Yu, Haoran Geng, Yufei Ding, Jiayi Chen, and He Wang. Dexgraspnet 2.0: Learning generative dexterous grasping in large-scale synthetic cluttered scenes. 2024. 8, 9, 10

    2024

  39. [47]

    Tongjie Y Zhang and Ching Y . Suen. A fast parallel algorithm for thinning digital patterns. Communications of the ACM, 27(3):236–239, 1984. 5

    1984

  40. [48]

    Segment everything everywhere all at once

    Xueyan Zou, Jianwei Yang, Hao Zhang, Feng Li, Linjie Li, Jianfeng Wang, Lijuan Wang, Jianfeng Gao, and Yong Jae Lee. Segment everything everywhere all at once. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024. 3, 8, 9 14

    2024

  41. [2024]

    10, 2024

    Accessed: Oct. 10, 2024. 2

    2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.