Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Demonstrating DVS: Dynamic Virtual-Real Simulation Platform for Mobile Robotic Tasks

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A simulation platform that syncs virtual and real robots in one coordinate frame for dynamic indoor tasks.

desk verdict Useful systems integration for indoor robot sim, but the headline virtual-real sync claim is asserted rather than measured. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.18944 v1 pith:YL7IHXFP submitted 2025-04-26 cs.RO

Zijie Zheng , Zeshun Li , Yunpeng Wang , Qinghongbing Xie , Long Zeng This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.RO
keywords simulationplatformvirtual-realsynchronizationmotioncapturepedestriantrajectorypredictionsocialnavigationrobotgraspingsim-to-realtransferROS
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

DVS is a simulation platform for mobile robots that couples a configurable virtual environment with a physical setup through optical motion capture, so a robot's pose in the real world maps into the simulated world in real time. The paper claims this closed loop supports the full workflow: generating annotated RGB, depth, segmentation, and trajectory data, training policies in dynamic indoor scenes with simulated pedestrians, and then validating or intervening during real grasping and navigation. Experiments show the platform can run pedestrian trajectory prediction, social navigation, and pick-and-place tasks, including mid-task intervention that reroutes a robotic arm from one prompt to another. A sympathetic reading is that DVS is not a single-task simulator but an infrastructure claim: one coordinate frame, one data format, and one communication layer for long-horizon virtual-real robotic research.

What carries the argument

The mechanism that carries the argument is the bidirectional pose-synchronization pipeline: motion-capture cameras track rigid bodies, VRPN streams the poses, ROS relays them, and a rigid transform $T_{\mathrm{virtual}} = R\,T_{\mathrm{real}} + t$ registers the real and virtual coordinate frames. Around this core sit the dynamic pedestrian plugin, with variable speeds, randomized spawn points, and socially compliant avoidance, and the perception data generator, which uses smooth Bezier camera trajectories and depth-to-RGB alignment. Together these let the platform claim closed-loop benchmarking: a physical robot and its virtual twin share poses, so interventions applied in the virtual scene reach the real manipulator.

What would settle it

Move a rigid-body target along a known measured path, such as on a coordinate measuring machine or a precision linear stage, while recording motion-capture poses; if the residual transform error exceeds the claimed 0.1 mm / 0.1 degree, the synchronization guarantee is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that dynamic virtual-real fusion can be assembled from motion capture pose tracking, ROS messaging, and a simulation scene graph, and that this assembly yields a platform where simulation-trained models can be evaluated and steered in real time. The load-bearing result is the synchronized pose mapping $T_{\mathrm{virtual}} = R\,T_{\mathrm{real}} + t$ from a 14-camera optical system, which aligns real end-effector positions with virtual objects. On this base, DVS adds stochastic pedestrian agents with adjustable avoidance radii and spawning, plus a data generator producing RGB, depth, semantic labels, and trajectories. The experiments demonstrate three task families: indoor pedestrian trajectory prediction, social navigation with varying crowd density, and grasping with in-task intervention and virtual-real finetuning.

Load-bearing premise

That the motion-capture system really delivers 0.1 mm positional and 0.1 degree rotational accuracy in the experimental setup, since this specification anchors the virtual-real pose alignment on which the closed-loop claims depend.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the synchronization holds, a policy trained purely on synthetic indoor scenes can be evaluated against its physical counterpart without a separate sim-to-real retraining step.
  • Mid-task intervention becomes a reproducible experiment: changing the virtual goal propagates to the real robot through the shared pose frame, which the grasping trials use to recover from wrong instructions.
  • The trajectory-prediction benchmarks on Gym, Office, and Supermarket scenes give a quantitative measure of how much indoor density and obstacles degrade outdoor-trained predictors.
  • Social-navigation results across crowd sizes provide a stress test for collision-avoidance policies, with success rates falling as pedestrian count rises.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the virtual-real loop is as tight as claimed, DVS could serve as a testbed for real-time human intervention policies, since the same coordinate frame lets a human edit the scene while the robot executes—an under-explored mode in most simulators.
  • The method implies a standardization opportunity: motion-capture-linked simulation could be used to measure the sim-to-real gap directly, by comparing virtual and real trajectories under identical prompts.
  • A direct testable extension would be to run the same grasping intervention with the motion-capture synchronization temporarily disabled; the success-rate drop would quantify how much of the benefit comes from pose alignment rather than the intervention workflow.
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

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents DVS, a simulation platform for mobile robotics that combines large-scale editable indoor scenes, a dynamic pedestrian behavior plugin, multi-robot support, and an optical motion-capture system intended to provide bidirectional virtual-real synchronization via VRPN and ROS. The authors describe the system architecture and report four application studies: camera-trajectory smoothing for data generation, virtual-real intervention grasping with OpenVLA-7B and RDT-1B, real-to-sim-to-real finetuning for grasping, pedestrian trajectory prediction, and social navigation. The central claimed contribution is closed-loop virtual-real fusion that supports benchmarking and human intervention in real robot execution.

Significance. If the virtual-real synchronization claim were substantiated, DVS would occupy a genuinely useful niche: most existing simulators either lack dynamic pedestrian modeling or do not integrate real-world feedback into the loop. The platform's breadth is attractive, and the paper makes concrete contributions in assembling a dynamic scene editor, a pedestrian plugin, a data-generation interface, and ROS-based communication into one system. The open website and the multi-task demonstration are also assets. However, the load-bearing feature, precise bidirectional synchronization, is currently asserted rather than demonstrated, and the experiments that are meant to validate it are too weak to carry the paper's central claim. The paper is best positioned as a platform/demonstration report, not as an algorithmic contribution.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section III-A-1 and Eq. (1)] The paper states that the 14-camera motion capture system provides 0.1 mm positional and 0.1 degree rotational accuracy, but this is a hardware specification, not a property of the assembled DVS pipeline. No calibration residual, no end-to-end pose error after extrinsic calibration plus VRPN/ROS transport, and no latency measurement are reported. Since 'precise bidirectional synchronization' is the paper's core contribution, the authors should provide a calibration and measurement protocol, e.g., moving a tracked target through the workspace and comparing its real pose (measured by an independent method or by mocap ground truth) with the pose received by the virtual scene, including error statistics and latency.
  2. [Section IV-B-1, Table III] The intervention grasping experiment does not test pose synchronization. The results show that when the first prompt is wrong and the platform issues a new prompt, the arm executes the second task; this is command interruption or prompt switching and would work without motion-capture alignment. There is no condition that varies synchronization quality and no measurement of whether the virtual scene matched the real robot's actual position during the task. Consequently, Table III cannot support the claim that virtual-real fusion improves task execution.
  3. [Section IV-B-2, Table IV] The sentence that 'the virtual-real fusion method led to significantly better performance' is not supported by the reported data. The comparisons are 6/10 versus 9/10 and 4/10 versus 8/10 across 10 trials per condition, with no repetitions, no error bars, no confidence intervals, and no statistical test. In addition, the composition of the 'virtual-real' finetuning data is not described (e.g., number of virtual demos, number of real demos, mixing ratio, and whether the same real demos were used in both conditions). This experiment is the central evidence for the real-to-sim-to-real learning claim and needs a proper evaluation protocol.
  4. [Sections IV-B-3 and IV-B-4, Tables V and VI] Quantitative claims are made without variance, trial counts, or episode counts. The trajectory-prediction tables report single ADE/FDE values per scene and method, and the social-navigation table reports one success rate, collision rate, and navigation time per configuration. The authors' claim that performance 'deteriorates' with increased pedestrian density is not statistically quantified. If DVS is meant to support benchmarking, the evaluation protocol should include repeated runs, error bars, and effect sizes; otherwise the comparisons are illustrative rather than evidential.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section IV-B-3] The sentence 'the ADE for STGAT decreases from 0.79 to 1.42 (79.7%)' is contradictory because larger ADE indicates worse performance; it should say 'increases' or 'deteriorates'.
  2. [Section IV-B-1] The statement 'nearly a hundred grasping data points' should be made precise: give the exact number of demonstrations, the number per task, and the number used for each finetuning condition.
  3. [Equation (1)] Equation (1) uses T_virtual, T_real, R, and t without distinguishing between points and matrices, and it does not explain how R and t are obtained (e.g., a rigid least-squares fit); please use standard homogeneous-transform notation and specify the calibration objective.
  4. [Section IV-A, Table II] The 'Straight' and 'Smooth' camera trajectories are not defined (path length, number of frames, camera speed, and smoothing parameters), and the reported average feature counts lack standard deviations, making the comparison difficult to reproduce.
  5. [Section IV-B-3] The name 'Trajectoron' is a typo for 'Trajectron++', which appears correctly in the table but incorrectly in the text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the platform claims rest on demonstrations and external benchmarks, with unverified vendor specs being an evidence gap rather than a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. Equation (1) is simply a rigid-body coordinate transform for extrinsic calibration, not a fitted quantity that is later renamed as a prediction. The core claims — dynamic pedestrian modeling, synthetic data generation, and virtual-real synchronization — are supported by platform demonstrations and by evaluations of external algorithms (STGAT, Trajectron++, TUTR, ORCA, DS-RNN, AttnGraph) on DVS-generated scenes plus the public ETH dataset. No parameter is fitted to a subset of results and then predicted on a closely related quantity: Table III demonstrates command interruption, Table IV compares finetuning-data conditions, and Tables V and VI report benchmark-style evaluations of published methods without fitting platform parameters. Self-citations appear (e.g., refs. [2], [11], [18], [37]) but they are used for related-task context and a user-interface dataset reference, not as load-bearing justification for the central virtual-real fusion mechanism. The asserted 0.1 mm positional and 0.1 degree rotational accuracy of the motion-capture system is a vendor specification presented without an end-to-end calibration or latency measurement, but that is an evidence/validity concern, not circularity: the claim does not reduce by construction to its own inputs. No circular step is identifiable from the text.

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

The paper's claims rest on domain assumptions about hardware precision (motion capture), synthetic data fidelity, and ROS reliability, none of which are directly verified with independent measurements.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Motion capture system achieves submillimeter accuracy (0.1 mm positional, 0.1 degree rotational).
    Assumed in Section III-A-1 without a calibration or measurement protocol.
  • domain assumption Synthetic pedestrian behaviors generated by the plug-in are realistic proxies for human indoor motion.
    Used for evaluation in Sections IV-B-3 and IV-B-4; no validation against real-world pedestrian data.
  • domain assumption ROS-based communication correctly synchronizes virtual and real robot states.
    Relies on standard ROS functionality; assumed functional throughout without failure analysis.
  • domain assumption Depth-to-RGB temporal alignment and Bezier smoothing improve perception data quality.
    Claimed in Section IV-A based on feature matching counts from two scenes only.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Demonstrating DVS: Dynamic Virtual-Real Simulation Platform for Mobile Robotic Tasks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YL7IHXFP

@misc{pith2026250418944,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Demonstrating DVS: Dynamic Virtual-Real Simulation Platform for Mobile Robotic Tasks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YL7IHXFP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.18944}
}
read the original abstract

With the development of embodied artificial intelligence, robotic research has increasingly focused on complex tasks. Existing simulation platforms, however, are often limited to idealized environments, simple task scenarios and lack data interoperability. This restricts task decomposition and multi-task learning. Additionally, current simulation platforms face challenges in dynamic pedestrian modeling, scene editability, and synchronization between virtual and real assets. These limitations hinder real world robot deployment and feedback. To address these challenges, we propose DVS (Dynamic Virtual-Real Simulation Platform), a platform for dynamic virtual-real synchronization in mobile robotic tasks. DVS integrates a random pedestrian behavior modeling plugin and large-scale, customizable indoor scenes for generating annotated training datasets. It features an optical motion capture system, synchronizing object poses and coordinates between virtual and real world to support dynamic task benchmarking. Experimental validation shows that DVS supports tasks such as pedestrian trajectory prediction, robot path planning, and robotic arm grasping, with potential for both simulation and real world deployment. In this way, DVS represents more than just a versatile robotic platform; it paves the way for research in human intervention in robot execution tasks and real-time feedback algorithms in virtual-real fusion environments. More information about the simulation platform is available on https://immvlab.github.io/DVS/.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.18944 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Overview of DVS platform, which offers a variety of large-scale indoor scene types and dynamic element plugins on [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Virtual-Real Data Synchronization Framework. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The interactive interface of the simulation platform: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The robotic arm is interrupted while executing Prompt [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Visualization of pedestrian trajectory prediction, where [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Home: A household multimodal environment

    Simon Brodeur, Ethan Perez, Ankesh Anand, Flo- rian Golemo, Luca Celotti, Florian Strub, Jean Rouat, Hugo Larochelle, and Aaron Courville. Home: A household multimodal environment. arXiv preprint arXiv:1711.11017, 2017

    arXiv 2017

  2. [2]

    Fusednet: End- to-end mobile robot relocalization in dynamic large-scale scene

    Fang-xing Chen, Yifan Tang, Cong Tai, Xue-ping Liu, Xiang Wu, Tao Zhang, and Long Zeng. Fusednet: End- to-end mobile robot relocalization in dynamic large-scale scene. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , 9(5): 4099–4105, 2024

    work page 2024

  3. [3]

    Pybullet, a python module for physics simulation for games, robotics and machine learning, 2016

    Erwin Coumans and Yunfei Bai. Pybullet, a python module for physics simulation for games, robotics and machine learning, 2016

    2016

  4. [4]

    Superpoint: Self-supervised interest point de- tection and description

    Daniel DeTone, Tomasz Malisiewicz, and Andrew Rabi- novich. Superpoint: Self-supervised interest point de- tection and description. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition workshops, pages 224–236, 2018

    2018

  5. [5]

    Ppr-net:point-wise pose regression network for instance segmentation and 6d pose estimation in bin-picking scenarios

    Zhikai Dong, Sicheng Liu, Tao Zhou, Hui Cheng, Long Zeng, Xingyao Yu, and Houde Liu. Ppr-net:point-wise pose regression network for instance segmentation and 6d pose estimation in bin-picking scenarios. In 2019 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), page 1773–1780. IEEE Press, 2019

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Mo- bile aloha: Learning bimanual mobile manipulation with low-cost whole-body teleoperation

    Zipeng Fu, Tony Z Zhao, and Chelsea Finn. Mo- bile aloha: Learning bimanual mobile manipulation with low-cost whole-body teleoperation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.02117, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  7. [7]

    Threedworld: A platform for interac- tive multi-modal physical simulation

    Chuang Gan, Jeremy Schwartz, Seth Alter, Damian Mrowca, Martin Schrimpf, James Traer, Julian De Fre- itas, Jonas Kubilius, Abhishek Bhandwaldar, Nick Haber, et al. Threedworld: A platform for interac- tive multi-modal physical simulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.04954, 2020

    arXiv 2007

  8. [8]

    Dialfred: Dialogue-enabled agents for embodied instruction fol- lowing

    Xiaofeng Gao, Qiaozi Gao, Ran Gong, Kaixiang Lin, Govind Thattai, and Gaurav S Sukhatme. Dialfred: Dialogue-enabled agents for embodied instruction fol- lowing. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters , 7(4): 10049–10056, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 48 references
  1. [9]

    Sd-net: Symmetric-aware keypoint prediction and domain adaptation for 6d pose estimation in bin-picking scenarios

    Ding-Tao Huang, En-Te Lin, Lipeng Chen, Li-Fu Liu, and Long Zeng. Sd-net: Symmetric-aware keypoint prediction and domain adaptation for 6d pose estimation in bin-picking scenarios. In 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , pages 2747–...

    2024

  2. [10]

    Stgat: Modeling spatial-temporal interac- tions for human trajectory prediction

    Yingfan Huang, Huikun Bi, Zhaoxin Li, Tianlu Mao, and Zhaoqi Wang. Stgat: Modeling spatial-temporal interac- tions for human trajectory prediction. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, pages 6272–6281, 2019

    2019

  3. [11]

    A two-stage reinforcement learning approach for robot navigation in long-range indoor dense crowd environments

    Xing Hui Jing, Xin Xiong, Fu Hao Li, Tao Zhang, and Long Zeng. A two-stage reinforcement learning approach for robot navigation in long-range indoor dense crowd environments. In 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , pages 5489–5496, 2024

    2024

  4. [12]

    Arena 3.0: Advancing social navigation in collaborative and highly dynamic environments

    Linh K ¨astner, V olodymyir Shcherbyna, Huajian Zeng, Tuan Anh Le, Maximilian Ho-Kyoung Schreff, Halid Os- maev, Nam Truong Tran, Diego Diaz, Jan Golebiowski, Harold Soh, et al. Arena 3.0: Advancing social navigation in collaborative and highly dynamic environments. arXiv prep...

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Openvla: An open-source vision-language-action model

    Moo Jin Kim, Karl Pertsch, Siddharth Karamcheti, Ted Xiao, Ashwin Balakrishna, Suraj Nair, Rafael Rafailov, Ethan Foster, Grace Lam, Pannag Sanketi, et al. Openvla: An open-source vision-language-action model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09246, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Design and use paradigms for gazebo, an open-source multi-robot sim- ulator

    Nathan Koenig and Andrew Howard. Design and use paradigms for gazebo, an open-source multi-robot sim- ulator. In 2004 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS)(IEEE Cat. No. 04CH37566), volume 3, pages 2149–2154. Ieee, 2004

    2004

  7. [15]

    Ai2-thor: An interactive 3d environment for visual ai

    Eric Kolve, Roozbeh Mottaghi, Winson Han, Eli Vander- Bilt, Luca Weihs, Alvaro Herrasti, Matt Deitke, Kiana Ehsani, Daniel Gordon, Yuke Zhu, et al. Ai2-thor: An interactive 3d environment for visual ai. arXiv preprint arXiv:1712.05474, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Path planning method for on-machine inspection of aerospace structures based on adjacent feature graph

    Bo Li, Pingfa Feng, Long Zeng, Chao Xu, and Jianfu Zhang. Path planning method for on-machine inspection of aerospace structures based on adjacent feature graph. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing , 54: 17–34, 2018

    2018

  9. [17]

    igibson 2.0: Object-centric simulation for robot learning of everyday household tasks

    Chengshu Li, Fei Xia, Roberto Mart ´ın-Mart´ın, Michael Lingelbach, Sanjana Srivastava, Bokui Shen, Kent Vainio, Cem Gokmen, Gokul Dharan, Tanish Jain, et al. igibson 2.0: Object-centric simulation for robot learning of everyday household tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2108.03272, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Dual-alignment domain adaptation for pedestrian trajectory prediction

    Wenzhan Li, Fuhao Li, Xinghui Jing, Pingfa Feng, and Long Zeng. Dual-alignment domain adaptation for pedestrian trajectory prediction. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 9(12):10962–10969, 2024

    2024

  11. [19]

    Lightglue: Local feature matching at light speed

    Philipp Lindenberger, Paul-Edouard Sarlin, and Marc Pollefeys. Lightglue: Local feature matching at light speed. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision , pages 17627–17638, 2023

    2023

  12. [20]

    Decen- tralized structural-rnn for robot crowd navigation with deep reinforcement learning

    Shuijing Liu, Peixin Chang, Weihang Liang, Neeloy Chakraborty, and Katherine Driggs-Campbell. Decen- tralized structural-rnn for robot crowd navigation with deep reinforcement learning. In 2021 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) , pages 3517–3524. ...

    2021

  13. [21]

    Liv- ingston McPherson, Junyi Geng, and Katherine Driggs- Campbell

    Shuijing Liu, Peixin Chang, Zhe Huang, Neeloy Chakraborty, Kaiwen Hong, Weihang Liang, D. Liv- ingston McPherson, Junyi Geng, and Katherine Driggs- Campbell. Intention aware robot crowd navigation with attention-based interaction graph. In IEEE International Conference on Robo...

    2023

  14. [22]

    Rdt-1b: a diffusion foundation model for bimanual manipulation

    Songming Liu, Lingxuan Wu, Bangguo Li, Hengkai Tan, Huayu Chen, Zhengyi Wang, Ke Xu, Hang Su, and Jun Zhu. Rdt-1b: a diffusion foundation model for bimanual manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.07864 , 2024

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Robot learning towards smart robotic man- ufacturing: A review

    Zhihao Liu, Quan Liu, Wenjun Xu, Lihui Wang, and Zude Zhou. Robot learning towards smart robotic man- ufacturing: A review. Robotics and Computer-Integrated Manufacturing, 77:102360, 2022

    2022

  16. [24]

    Integrating social assistive robots, iot, virtual communities and smart objects to assist at-home indepen- dently living elders: the movecare project

    Matteo Luperto, Javier Monroy, Jennifer Renoux, Francesca Lunardini, Nicola Basilico, Maria Bulgheroni, Angelo Cangelosi, Matteo Cesari, Manuel Cid, Aladar Ianes, et al. Integrating social assistive robots, iot, virtual communities and smart objects to assist at-home indepen- ...

    2023

  17. [25]

    Human– robot collaboration in manufacturing applications: A re- view

    Eloise Matheson, Riccardo Minto, Emanuele GG Zampieri, Maurizio Faccio, and Giulio Rosati. Human– robot collaboration in manufacturing applications: A re- view. Robotics, 8(4):100, 2019

    2019

  18. [26]

    Orbit: A unified simulation framework for interactive robot learning environments

    Mayank Mittal, Calvin Yu, Qinxi Yu, Jingzhou Liu, Nikita Rudin, David Hoeller, Jia Lin Yuan, Ritvik Singh, Yunrong Guo, Hammad Mazhar, Ajay Mandlekar, Buck Babich, Gavriel State, Marco Hutter, and Animesh Garg. Orbit: A unified simulation framework for interactive robot learni...

    2023

  19. [27]

    Human-in-the-loop machine learning: a state of the art

    Eduardo Mosqueira-Rey, Elena Hern ´andez-Pereira, David Alonso-R ´ıos, Jos ´e Bobes-Bascar ´an, and ´Angel Fern´andez-Leal. Human-in-the-loop machine learning: a state of the art. Artificial Intelligence Review , 56(4): 3005–3054, 2023

    2023

  20. [28]

    TEACh: Task-driven Embodied Agents that Chat

    Aishwarya Padmakumar, Jesse Thomason, Ayush Shri- vastava, Patrick Lange, Anjali Narayan-Chen, Spandana Gella, Robinson Piramuthu, Gokhan Tur, and Dilek Hakkani-Tur. TEACh: Task-driven Embodied Agents that Chat. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence ...

    2017

  21. [29]

    You’ll never walk alone: Modeling social behavior for multi-target tracking

    Stefano Pellegrini, Andreas Ess, Konrad Schindler, and Luc Van Gool. You’ll never walk alone: Modeling social behavior for multi-target tracking. In 2009 IEEE 12th international conference on computer vision , pages 261–

    2009

  22. [30]

    Virtualhome: Simulating household activities via programs

    Xavier Puig, Kevin Ra, Marko Boben, Jiaman Li, Tingwu Wang, Sanja Fidler, and Antonio Torralba. Virtualhome: Simulating household activities via programs. In Pro- ceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition, pages 8494–8502, 2018

    2018

  23. [31]

    Habitat 3.0: A co-habitat for humans, avatars and robots

    Xavier Puig, Eric Undersander, Andrew Szot, Mikael Dallaire Cote, Tsung-Yen Yang, Ruslan Partsey, Ruta Desai, Alexander William Clegg, Michal Hlavac, So Yeon Min, et al. Habitat 3.0: A co-habitat for humans, avatars and robots. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.13724 , 2023

    arXiv

  24. [32]

    Trajectron++: Dynamically-feasible trajectory forecasting with heterogeneous data

    Tim Salzmann, Boris Ivanovic, Punarjay Chakravarty, and Marco Pavone. Trajectron++: Dynamically-feasible trajectory forecasting with heterogeneous data. In Com- puter Vision–ECCV 2020: 16th European Conference, Glasgow, UK, August 23–28, 2020, Proceedings, Part XVIII 16, pages...

    2020

  25. [33]

    Habitat: A platform for embodied ai research

    Manolis Savva, Abhishek Kadian, Oleksandr Maksymets, Yili Zhao, Erik Wijmans, Bhavana Jain, Julian Straub, Jia Liu, Vladlen Koltun, Jitendra Malik, et al. Habitat: A platform for embodied ai research. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF international conference on computer vision, ...

    2019

  26. [34]

    igibson 1.0: A simulation environment for interactive tasks in large realistic scenes

    Bokui Shen, Fei Xia, Chengshu Li, Roberto Mart ´ın- Mart´ın, Linxi Fan, Guanzhi Wang, Claudia P ´erez- D’Arpino, Shyamal Buch, Sanjana Srivastava, Lyne Tchapmi, et al. igibson 1.0: A simulation environment for interactive tasks in large realistic scenes. In 2021 IEEE/RSJ Inter...

    2021

  27. [35]

    Trajectory unified transformer for pedestrian trajectory prediction

    Liushuai Shi, Le Wang, Sanping Zhou, and Gang Hua. Trajectory unified transformer for pedestrian trajectory prediction. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Interna- tional Conference on Computer Vision , pages 9675– 9684, 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    Habitat 2.0: Training home assistants to rearrange their habitat

    Andrew Szot, Alexander Clegg, Eric Undersander, Erik Wijmans, Yili Zhao, John Turner, Noah Maestre, Mustafa Mukadam, Devendra Singh Chaplot, Oleksandr Maksymets, et al. Habitat 2.0: Training home assistants to rearrange their habitat. Advances in neural information processing ...

    2021

  29. [37]

    Mobile robot oriented large-scale indoor dataset for dynamic scene understanding

    Yi-Fan Tang, Cong Tai, Fang-Xing Chen, Wan-Ting Zhang, Tao Zhang, Xue-Ping Liu, Yong-Jin Liu, and Long Zeng. Mobile robot oriented large-scale indoor dataset for dynamic scene understanding. In 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 613–620, 2024

    2024

  30. [38]

    Mujoco: A physics engine for model-based control

    Emanuel Todorov, Tom Erez, and Yuval Tassa. Mujoco: A physics engine for model-based control. In 2012 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems, pages 5026–5033. IEEE, 2012

    2012

  31. [39]

    Sohn, Greg Schwartz, Subashri Ramesh, Mohamed Hussein, Anjali W

    Nathan Tsoi, Alec Xiang, Peter Yu, Samuel S. Sohn, Greg Schwartz, Subashri Ramesh, Mohamed Hussein, Anjali W. Gupta, Mubbasir Kapadia, and Marynel V´azquez. Sean 2.0: Formalizing and generating social situations for robot navigation. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 7(4):...

    2022

  32. [40]

    Reciprocal n-body collision avoidance

    Jur Van Den Berg, Stephen J Guy, Ming Lin, and Dinesh Manocha. Reciprocal n-body collision avoidance. In Robotics Research: The 14th International Symposium ISRR, pages 3–19. Springer, 2011

    2011

  33. [41]

    Demonstrating humanthor: A simulation platform and benchmark for human-robot collaboration in a shared workspace

    Chenxu Wang, Boyuan Du, Jiaxin Xu, Peiyan Li, Di Guo, and Huaping Liu. Demonstrating humanthor: A simulation platform and benchmark for human-robot collaboration in a shared workspace. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.06498, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Sapien: A simulated part-based interactive environment

    Fanbo Xiang, Yuzhe Qin, Kaichun Mo, Yikuan Xia, Hao Zhu, Fangchen Liu, Minghua Liu, Hanxiao Jiang, Yifu Yuan, He Wang, et al. Sapien: A simulated part-based interactive environment. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF conference on computer vision and pattern recognition , pages 11...

    2020

  35. [43]

    Assembly language design and development for recon- figurable flexible assembly line

    Leicai Xiao, Long Zeng, Zhaobo Xu, and Xueping Liu. Assembly language design and development for recon- figurable flexible assembly line. Robotics and Computer- Integrated Manufacturing, 80:102467, 2023

    2023

  36. [44]

    Reconfigurable flexible assembly model and implementation for cross-category products

    Zhaobo Xu, Chaoran Zhang, Song Hu, Zhaochun Han, Pingfa Feng, and Long Zeng. Reconfigurable flexible assembly model and implementation for cross-category products. Journal of Manufacturing Systems , 77:154– 169, 2024

    2024

  37. [45]

    Parametricnet: 6dof pose estimation network for parametric shapes in stacked scenarios

    Long Zeng, Wei Jie Lv, Xin Yu Zhang, and Yong Jin Liu. Parametricnet: 6dof pose estimation network for parametric shapes in stacked scenarios. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 772–778, 2021

    2021

  38. [46]

    Ppr-net++: Accurate 6-d pose estimation in stacked sce- narios

    Long Zeng, Weijie Lv, Zhi-Kai Dong, and Yong Liu. Ppr-net++: Accurate 6-d pose estimation in stacked sce- narios. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and Engineering, 19:3139–3151, 2022

    2022

  39. [47]

    Rein- forcement learning based pushing and grasping objects from ungraspable poses

    Hao Zhang, Hongzhuo Liang, Lin Cong, Jianzhi Lyu, Long Zeng, Pingfa Feng, and Jianwei Zhang. Rein- forcement learning based pushing and grasping objects from ungraspable poses. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pages 3860–3866, 2023

    2023

  40. [48]

    Domain adaptation on point clouds for 6d pose estimation in bin-picking scenarios

    Liang Zhao, Meng Sun, Wei Jie Lv, Xin Yu Zhang, and Long Zeng. Domain adaptation on point clouds for 6d pose estimation in bin-picking scenarios. In 2023 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) , pages 2925–2931, 2023

    2023

Pith tools

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