Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 44 references

A robot plans multi-step tabletop actions from text goals by predicting visual futures and tracking occluded objects, then adapts real scenes to match its simulation training style.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

Affordance recognition, multi-step visual effect prediction, and multimodal text matching produce robot plans that handle occlusion; real-to-sim conversion enables hardware transfer.

T0 review reviewed 2026-07-14 challenge →

load-bearing objection Solid systems extension of their prior visual-affordance planner: text goals, occlusion-tracking masks, and a real-to-sim converter that actually runs on hardware, with honest failure diagnosis. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.11004 v1 pith:BSFBTYFG submitted 2026-07-13 cs.RO cs.AI

Affordance-Based Manipulation Planning with Text Goals and Sim-to-Real Generalisation via Real-to-Sim Image Conversion

Solvi Arnold , Rin Karashima , Tadashi Adachi , Takafumi Mochizuki , Kimitoshi Yamazaki This is my paper
classification cs.RO cs.AI
keywords manipulation planningaffordanceseffect predictiontext goalsreal-to-simobject masksocclusionmulti-modal matching
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The reading

This paper presents a complete manipulation planner that finds which grasps, places, pushes and inserts are available in a scene, predicts their visual effects step by step, and scores those predicted futures against free-form text goals. Object masks named in the goal are carried forward through the predictions, so the planner can still succeed when key objects become fully hidden or lose their original visual identity. A real-to-sim image converter maps photographs of variously coloured and textured objects into the consistent appearance the rest of the system was trained on, allowing the same planner to run on a physical robot. The authors show that the integrated system produces sensible multi-step plans for nine of ten deliberately hard simulation tasks and transfers partial capability to hardware. A sympathetic reader cares because the approach replaces hand-written rules or pure language models with fine-grained visual foresight that can handle occlusion, secondary effects and temporary undoing of already-satisfied goals.

Core claim

A planning system that chains affordance recognition with multi-step visual effect prediction can generate correct multi-step manipulation plans from text goals even when objects become fully occluded or unidentifiable by their original descriptors, and real-to-sim image conversion lets the same system operate on physical objects of varied appearance.

What carries the argument

The Effect Prediction Module (EPM) with dual viewpoints and object-mask channels: it recentres and rotates each state around the chosen affordance, predicts the next RGBD-plus-mask image, and thereby keeps named objects trackable through occlusion so that the Goal-Matching Module can still score agreement with the text goal.

Load-bearing premise

That multi-step visual predictions stay accurate enough for both affordance recognition and goal matching after several chained steps and after real-to-sim conversion.

What would settle it

On a new set of tasks that require three or more sequential actions with progressive occlusion, measure whether the final predicted state still yields high goal-matching scores and whether the executed plan actually reaches the described goal; systematic failure would falsify the claim that the prediction chain remains usable.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Text goals that mention objects that will become fully hidden can still be planned for, because the mask channels preserve their locations.
  • Plans that temporarily undo an already-satisfied goal condition become discoverable without symbolic search.
  • A single simulation-trained planner can be reused on real objects of novel colour and texture once an image converter is available.
  • Secondary effects such as an object riding along on a plate can be exploited automatically because they appear in the visual predictions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same mask-tracking idea could be extended to non-rigid objects if the prediction network is trained to deform the masks.
  • Hybridising the visual search with a lightweight symbolic filter could cut the current multi-minute planning times while retaining the fine-grained verification.
  • If the real-to-sim converter is trained jointly with the predictor, the residual domain gap that still causes hardware failures may shrink further.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents an integrated affordance-based manipulation planner that combines neural affordance recognition (ARM), multi-step visual effect prediction (EPM) with dual-view recentering and persistent object-mask channels (RGBDMMM), a multimodal goal-matching module (GMM) for free-form text goals, and a real-to-sim image conversion module (ICM) based on ControlNet/Stable Diffusion for hardware transfer. Building on prior work [2], the system searches sequences of parametrised affordances (GRASP/PLACE/PUSH/INSERT), scores predicted futures against run-time text goals, and tracks named objects through occlusion. Module-level metrics (Tables 3–6) and qualitative multi-step plans on 10 hand-designed simulation tasks (9/10 sensible; Fig. 9) plus mixed hardware results (Table 8, Fig. 10) are reported, with candid diagnosis of composition failures after ICM conversion.

Significance. If the end-to-end claims hold, the work supplies a practical, fully visual pipeline that accepts natural-language outcome goals, reasons over secondary effects and temporary goal undoing, and maintains object identity under full occlusion—capabilities that remain rare in pure affordance or LLM planners. The real-to-sim conversion route and the explicit mask-channel design are reusable engineering contributions; the honest failure analysis and module isolation metrics strengthen reproducibility. The paper does not claim theoretical novelty beyond the integrated architecture, but the demonstrated foresight/occlusion tasks and hardware transfer are of clear interest to the manipulation-planning community.

major comments (3)
  1. [V.C, Table 4, VI, Fig. 9] Section V.C / Table 4 / Section VI: The central claim that the system “reasons through possible futures” and “tracks objects even when occluded” rests on chained EPM outputs remaining accurate enough for both ARM re-recognition and GMM scoring. Table 4 already shows rising changed-area error (0.042 o0.071) with depth, yet no mask-channel IoU, occlusion-specific accuracy, or GMM agreement numbers on predicted (vs. ground-truth) states are supplied; Table 5 evaluates GMM only on clean states. Without these measurements—or an ablation removing the mask channels on the occlusion-critical tasks 1, 4 and 10—the link between module metrics and plan quality remains qualitative.
  2. [VII.B, Table 8, VIII] Section VII / Table 8: Hardware success is reported for only five trials per task and drops sharply on several tasks (0/5 on 1, 6, 8, 10). The authors correctly attribute failures to ICM–EPM composition error, but the paper never quantifies how much GMM scores or plan rankings shift when the same goals are evaluated on ICM-converted or EPM-predicted images versus executed states. A short quantitative bridge (e.g., GMM score correlation or rank stability) is needed to substantiate the sim-to-real claim.
  3. [VII.A, Fig. 9] Section VII: All ten simulation tasks are hand-designed and no quantitative baseline (symbolic planner, LLM planner, or the prior image-goal system [2]) is reported. While the qualitative traps are well chosen, the absence of any comparative metric leaves the incremental benefit of text goals + mask tracking unmeasured and weakens the claim of “challenging” multi-step competence.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Fig. 2, Fig. 8] Fig. 2 and Fig. 8: The information-flow diagrams are dense; a short legend clarifying which tensors are RGBD versus RGBDMMM and when T / T^{-1} are applied would improve readability.
  2. [Table 1, V.D] Table 1: Sentence-pattern counts differ by nearly two orders of magnitude; the oversampling strategy is mentioned but the exact re-balancing weights are not stated, making the GMM training procedure harder to reproduce.
  3. [V.C] Section V.C: The memory-trace mechanism is introduced but the experiments “are not designed to require consideration of such effects.” Either remove the unused component or add a short controlled demonstration of its utility.
  4. [Appendix, VI] Appendix / Table 9–11: Hyper-parameter tables are thorough, yet the ARM confidence threshold (0.5) and the 100-pixel / 0.15 pruning rule used in planning are free parameters whose sensitivity is never reported.
  5. [Throughout, II] Typographical: “a n optional” (p. 3), “parametri sed” (multiple), “misshuujoutai” in reference [12] should be romanised consistently; “non-canonical affordance effects” is cited from [2] without a brief restatement for readers unfamiliar with that work.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: empirical NN modules trained/evaluated against external GT data and task outcomes; self-citation of prior architecture is non-load-bearing.

full rationale

This is a systems/ML robotics paper whose claims rest on independently trained neural modules (ARM, EPM, GMM, ICM) whose accuracies are measured against held-out ground-truth affordances, pixel errors, sentence-state labels, and SSIM/LPIPS (Tables 3–6), plus end-to-end plan success on human-designed tasks whose outcomes are observed after execution (Figs. 9–10, Table 8). There are no equations, fitted parameters, or uniqueness theorems that reduce a claimed prediction or first-principles result to its own inputs by construction. The sole self-citation of the authors’ prior work [2] supplies the base ARM/EPM architecture that is then expanded (masks, dual-view transforms, text GMM, ICM); the new modules and the multi-step occlusion/foresight results are evaluated separately and do not inherit their validity from that citation. No ansatz is smuggled, no known empirical pattern is merely renamed, and success metrics remain externally falsifiable. Hence the derivation chain is self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 2 invented entities

The central claim rests on four trained neural modules plus a deterministic search procedure. Free parameters are the usual network hyperparameters plus several inference thresholds chosen by hand. Domain axioms encode the discrete affordance repertoire, the limited object classes, and the assumption that visual prediction plus multimodal scoring is sufficient for plan selection. No new physical entities are postulated; the invented representations (mask channels, dual-view latent) are engineering constructs whose utility is measured by the reported experiments.

free parameters (5)
  • ARM confidence threshold
    Fixed at 0.5 for recognition matching; directly affects which affordances enter the search tree.
  • state-pruning pixel threshold
    100 pixels differing by >0.15 on RGB used to discard near-duplicate predictions; chosen without ablation.
  • EPM learning-rate schedule and signSGD settings
    Initial LR 5e-5, adaptive halving, termination at 1e-10; standard but free choices that determine final prediction quality.
  • GMM true/false decision threshold
    0.5 used for accuracy tables; also used implicitly when ranking plans.
  • ICM One-Class SVM outlier fraction ν
    Set to 0.03 to filter synthetic training images; affects the quality of the real-to-sim mapping.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The discrete affordance set {GRASP, PLACE, PUSH, INSERT} with the stated pose parametrisation and collision checks fully captures the robot’s useful action repertoire.
    Defined programmatically in Section IV; all planning is confined to this set.
  • domain assumption Objects belong to four parametrised classes (ball, cube, cup, plate) whose shape variation is covered by the training distribution.
    Stated in Section IV; text goals and mask tracking rely on these class names.
  • ad hoc to paper Orthogonal projection plus dual-view recentering makes absolute XY pose irrelevant for local effect prediction.
    Introduced in Section V.C to enable generalisation; correctness of the subsequent image transforms is assumed.
  • domain assumption Multimodal agreement scores on predicted mask channels are a reliable proxy for plan quality.
    Core of the GMM (Section V.D); used as the sole ranking criterion.
invented entities (2)
  • RGBDMMM state representation with persistent object-mask channels no independent evidence
    purpose: Track named objects through multi-step predictions even under full occlusion so that goal matching remains possible.
    Introduced in Section V.A; no independent physical existence, utility shown only inside the reported experiments.
  • Dual-view (robot + table) latent prediction with memory trace and update masks no independent evidence
    purpose: Predict both local action effects and global holding-pose appearance while allowing viewpoint transforms inside the computational graph.
    Core of the EPM (Section V.C, Fig. 3); engineering construct whose accuracy is measured by Table 4.

reviewed 2026-07-14 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Affordance-Based Manipulation Planning with Text Goals and Sim-to-Real Generalisation via Real-to-Sim Image Conversion." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BSFBTYFG

@misc{pith2026260711004,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Affordance-Based Manipulation Planning with Text Goals and Sim-to-Real Generalisation via Real-to-Sim Image Conversion},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BSFBTYFG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.11004}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

We present a manipulation planning system based on affordance recognition and action effect prediction. The system reasons through possible futures in visual form, and evaluates candidate plans by agreement of predicted outcomes with text-based goals set at run-time, using a multi-modal goal-matching module. Positions of objects named in the goal text are tracked through predictions even when occluded, making it possible to generate action plans even when objects become occluded, or when their initial descriptors cease to identify them in future states. We further expand the system with an image conversion module for translating real-world state images with objects of varied shapes and visual appearances into a consistent visual appearance, to facilitate manipulation planning in a physical robot setup. We evaluate performance of the system's modules in isolation and demonstrate the integrated system's manipulation planning capabilities on a set of challenging tasks in both simulation and on hardware.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 4 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    J. J. Gibson, The Senses Considered as Perceptual Systems, Boston, USA: Houghton Mifflin, 1966

    1966

  2. [2]

    Recognising Affordances in Predicted Futures to Plan With Consideration of Non-Canonical Affordance Effects,

    S. Arnold, M. Kuroishi, R. Karashima, T. Adachi and K. Yamazaki, "Recognising Affordances in Predicted Futures to Plan With Consideration of Non-Canonical Affordance Effects," IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 8, pp. 1455-1462, 2023

    2023

  3. [3]

    Bottom-up learning of object categories, action effects and logical rules: From continuous manipulative exploration to symbolic planning,

    E. Ugur and J. Piater, "Bottom-up learning of object categories, action effects and logical rules: From continuous manipulative exploration to symbolic planning," in 2015 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2015

    2015

  4. [4]

    Refining discovered symbols with multi-step interaction experience,

    E. Ugur and J. Piater, "Refining discovered symbols with multi-step interaction experience," in 2015 IEEE-RAS 15th International Conference on Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), 2015

    2015

  5. [5]

    Towards a cognitive robot that uses internal rehearsal to learn affordance relations,

    E. Erdemir, C. B. Frankel, K. Kawamura, S. M. Gordon, S. Thornton and B. Ulutas, "Towards a cognitive robot that uses internal rehearsal to learn affordance relations," in 2008 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2008

    2008

  6. [6]

    Multi-Object Graph Affordance Network: Goal-Oriented Planning through Learned Compound Object Affordances,

    T. Girgin and E. Uğur, "Multi-Object Graph Affordance Network: Goal-Oriented Planning through Learned Compound Object Affordances," IEEE Transactions on Cognitive and Developmental Systems, pp. 1-12, 2024

    2024

  7. [7]

    Learning Physical Intuition of Block Towers by Example,

    A. Lerer, S. Gross and R. Fergus, "Learning Physical Intuition of Block Towers by Example," in Proceedings of The 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning, New York, New York, USA, 2016

    2016

  8. [8]

    Deep Affordance Foresight: Planning Through What Can Be Done in the Future,

    D. Xu, A. Mandlekar, R. Martín-Martín, Y. Zhu, S. Savarese and L. Fei-Fei, "Deep Affordance Foresight: Planning Through What Can Be Done in the Future," in 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2021

    2021

  9. [9]

    Multi-step planning with learned effects of partial action executions,

    H. Aktas, U. Bozdogan and E. Ugur, “Multi-step planning with learned effects of partial action executions,” Advanced Robotics, vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 562-576, 2024

    2024

  10. [10]

    Generalizable Task Planning Through Representation Pretraining,

    C. Wang, D. Xu and L. Fei-Fei, "Generalizable Task Planning Through Representation Pretraining," IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, vol. 7, pp. 8299-8306, 2022

    2022

  11. [11]

    Search-Based Task Planning with Learned Skill Effect Models for Lifelong Robotic Manipulation,

    J. Liang, M. Sharma, A. L. LaGrassa, S. Vats, S. Saxena and O. Kroemer, "Search-Based Task Planning with Learned Skill Effect Models for Lifelong Robotic Manipulation," 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pp. 6351-6357, 2021

    2022

  12. [12]

    Toridashi konnan na misshuujoutai kara no hajisenryaku no jidouseisei (Automatic generation of grasping strategy for picking in challenging crowded states),

    H. Yamada, T. Motoda, T. Nishi, W. Wan and K. Harada, "Toridashi konnan na misshuujoutai kara no hajisenryaku no jidouseisei (Automatic generation of grasping strategy for picking in challenging crowded states)," in Proceedings of the 42rd Annual Conference of the RSJ (RSJ2024), 2024

    2024

  13. [13]

    CLIPort: What and Where Pathways for Robotic Manipulation,

    M. Shridhar, L. Manuelli and D. Fox, "CLIPort: What and Where Pathways for Robotic Manipulation," in Proceedings of the 5th Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL), 2021

    2021

  14. [14]

    One-Shot 3-D Affordance Learning for Multi-Stage Robotic Manipulation,

    H. Kim, Y. -J. Song, M. Lee and B. -T. Zhang, “One-Shot 3-D Affordance Learning for Multi-Stage Robotic Manipulation,” IEEE Access, vol. 14, 2026

    2026

  15. [15]

    Vision-Language Models as Success Detectors,

    Y. Du, K. Konyushkova, M. Denil, A. Raju, J. Landon, F. Hill, N. de Freitas and S. Cabi, "Vision-Language Models as Success Detectors," in Proceedings of The 2nd Conference on Lifelong Learning Agents, 2023

    2023

  16. [16]

    Unity: A General Platform for Intelligent Agents,

    A. Juliani, V.-P. Berges, E. Vckay, Y. Gao, H. Henry, M. Mattar and D. Lange, "Unity: A General Platform for Intelligent Agents," CoRR, vol. abs/1809.02627, 2018

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  17. [17]

    Unity robotics hub,

    "Unity robotics hub," 2020

    2020

  18. [18]

    Segment Anything,

    A. Kirillov, E. Mintun, N. Ravi, H. Mao, C. Rolland, L. Gustafson, T. Xiao, S. Whitehead, A. C. Berg, W.-Y. Lo, P. Dollár and R. Girshick, "Segment Anything," arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.02643, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  19. [19]

    Scaled-YOLOv4: Scaling Cross Stage Partial Network,

    C.-Y. Wang, A. Bochkovskiy and H.-Y. M. Liao, "Scaled-YOLOv4: Scaling Cross Stage Partial Network," in 2021 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2021

    2021

  20. [20]

    Visual Instruction Tuning,

    H. Liu, C. Li, Q. Wu and Y. J. Lee, "Visual Instruction Tuning," in Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2023

    2023

  21. [21]

    Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision,

    A. Radford, J. W. Kim, C. Hallacy, A. Ramesh, G. Goh, S. Agarwal, G. Sastry, A. Askell, P. Mishkin, J. Clark, G. Krueger and I. Sutskever, "Learning Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision," in International Conference on Machine Learning, 2021

    2021

  22. [22]

    Swin-Unet: Unet-Like Pure Transformer for Medical Image Segmentation,

    H. Cao, Y. Wang, J. Chen, D. Jiang, X. Zhang, Q. Tian and M. Wang, "Swin-Unet: Unet-Like Pure Transformer for Medical Image Segmentation," in Computer Vision – ECCV 2022 Workshops, Cham, 2023

    2022

  23. [23]

    GenAug: Retargeting behaviors to unseen situations via Generative Augmentation,

    Z. Chen, S. Kiami, A. Gupta and V. Kumar, "GenAug: Retargeting behaviors to unseen situations via Generative Augmentation," arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.06671, 2023

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  24. [24]

    Grasp-Anything: Large-scale Grasp Dataset from Foundation Models,

    A. D. Vuong, M. N. Vu, H. Le, B. Huang, H. T. T. Binh, T. Vo, A. Kugi and A. Nguyen, "Grasp-Anything: Large-scale Grasp Dataset from Foundation Models," in 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2024

    2024

  25. [25]

    High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Models,

    R. Rombach, A. Blattmann, D. Lorenz, P. Esser and B. Ommer, "High-Resolution Image Synthesis with Latent Diffusion Models," in 2022 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Los Alamitos, CA, USA, 2022

    2022

  26. [26]

    Adding Conditional Control to Text-to-Image Diffusion Models,

    L. Zhang, A. Rao and M. Agrawala, "Adding Conditional Control to Text-to-Image Diffusion Models," in 2023 IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2023

    2023

  27. [27]

    Estimating the Support of a High-Dimensional Distribution,

    B. Schölkopf, J. C. Platt, J. Shawe-Taylor, A. J. Smola and R. C. Williamson, "Estimating the Support of a High-Dimensional Distribution," Neural Computation, vol. 13, pp. 1443-1471, 2001

    2001

  28. [28]

    Albumentations: Fast and Flexible Image Augmentations,

    A. Buslaev, V. I. Iglovikov, E. Khvedchenya, A. Parinov, M. Druzhinin and A. A. Kalinin, "Albumentations: Fast and Flexible Image Augmentations," Information, vol. 11, 2020

    2020

  29. [29]

    The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metric,

    R. Zhang, P. Isola, A. A. Efros, E. Shechtman and O. Wang, "The Unreasonable Effectiveness of Deep Features as a Perceptual Metric," in 2018 IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2018

    2018

  30. [30]

    Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity,

    Z. Wang, A. C. Bovik, H. R. Sheikh and E. P. Simoncelli, "Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity," IEEE Transactions on Image Processing, vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 600 - 612, 2004

    2004

  31. [31]

    Reducing the Barrier to Entry of Complex Robotic Software: a MoveIt! Case 13 Study,

    D. Coleman, I. A. Șucan, S. Chitta and N. Correll, "Reducing the Barrier to Entry of Complex Robotic Software: a MoveIt! Case 13 Study," Journal of Software Engineering for Robotics, 5(1):3–16, vol. 5, pp. 3-16, May 2014

    2014

  32. [32]

    PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High- Performance Deep Learning Library,

    A. Paszke, S. Gross, F. Massa, A. Lerer, J. Bradbury, G. Chanan, T. Killeen, Z. Lin, N. Gimelshein, L. Antiga, A. Desmaison, A. Kopf, E. Yang, Z. DeVito, M. Raison, A. Tejani, S. Chilamkurthy, B. Steiner, L. Fang, J. Bai and S. Chintala, "PyTorch: An Imperative Style, High- Performance Deep Learning Library," in Advances in Neural Information Processing S...

    2019

  33. [33]

    JAX: composable transformations of Python+NumPy programs,

    J. Bradbury, R. Frostig, P. Hawkins, M. J. Johnson, C. Leary, D. Maclaurin, G. Necula, A. Paszke, J. VanderPlas, S. Wanderman- Milne and Q. Zhang, "JAX: composable transformations of Python+NumPy programs," 2018

    2018

  34. [34]

    signSGD: compressed optimisation for non-convex problems,

    J. Bernstein, Y.-X. Wang, K. Azizzadenesheli and A. Anandkumar, "signSGD: compressed optimisation for non-convex problems," 2018

    2018

  35. [35]

    Gaussian Error Linear Units (GELUs),

    D. Hendrycks and K. Gimpel, "Gaussian Error Linear Units (GELUs)," arXiv preprint arXiv:1606.08415, 2016. APPENDIX Here we specify the architectures and hyperparameters of the neural network architectures used in the various modules of the planning system. A. Affordance Recognition Module (ARM) The affordance recognition network is a modification of Scale...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  36. [36]

    Shift augmentation: we apply random shifts of -8 to +8 pixels along the X and Y axes, with corresponding ad- justments in affordance coordinates

  37. [37]

    Noise augmentation: we apply uniform noise from range [−𝑟, 𝑟], where 𝑟 is drawn randomly per example from [0,10], and clip the result to [0,255]

  38. [38]

    Artifact augmentation: we blend the state image with the previous state image from the same data sequence at a random intensity drawn per pixel from [0, 0.25). B. Effect Prediction Module (EPM) Table 10 specifies the architecture for the EPM , which is based on the prediction network of our previous work [2]. One pass through this architecture corresponds...

  39. [39]

    Mirroring of all states and affordances in a sequence

  40. [40]

    Affordance position & angle noise

  41. [41]

    Rotating affordance angles by 180 ° for affordances where this produces identical outcomes

  42. [42]

    Blacking out random patches of the input state areas that remain constant over the state sequence. C. Goal Matching Module (GMM) The GMM reuses parts of the CLIP [21] architecture, albeit in a different configuration and scaled down somewhat. Table 11 specifies the architecture. Table 11. Goal Matching Network Hyperparameters. Image encoder Activation 1x ...

  43. [43]

    8x Residual Attention Heads: 16 Output dim: 512 2x Linear Dims: 512→512 Transformer 8x Residual Attention Heads: 16 Output dim: 512 𝐺𝐸𝐿𝑈 MLP 3x Linear Dims: 512→256→128→1 𝐺𝐸𝐿𝑈 The goal matching network is trained using the following loss: 𝑙𝑜𝑠𝑠 = 1 𝑛𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑐ℎ ∑ 𝛼 ∙ (1 − 𝑒𝑙𝑖)𝛾 ∙ 𝑙𝑖 𝑖=𝑛𝑏𝑎𝑡𝑐ℎ 𝑖=1 𝑙𝑖 = 𝑦𝑖 ∙ log 𝜎(𝑥𝑖) + (1 + 𝑦𝑖) ∙ log(1 − 𝜎(𝑥𝑖)) where 𝑥𝑖 and 𝑦𝑖 are...

  44. [44]

    We use a cosine learning rate schedule that starts at 10−7, gradually increases to 10−5 over the first epoch, and then gradually decays again

    The network is trained using the Adam optimiser with hy- perparameters 𝛽1 = 0.9, 𝛽2 = 0.99, 𝜀 = 10−7 , and a weight decay of 10−7. We use a cosine learning rate schedule that starts at 10−7, gradually increases to 10−5 over the first epoch, and then gradually decays again. We train for 50 epochs in total. D. Image Conversion Module (ICM) The ICM adopts th...

This paper was first reviewed by grok-4.5 on July 14, 2026.