跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail

YOUR RESEARCH, IN SIGHT

让下一篇重要论文,不再错过。

覆盖计算机全学科,以 AI 为快捷入口。关注方向、作者和关键词,把发现变成持续的研究积累。

部分采集异常
正在读取账号与研究记录…

全站更新概况

+0新增论文
+0其中 AI 相关
+1已有论文修订
+100新增 AI 导读

arXiv 最近完成扫描:2026-11-08 17:39 · 全站最近入库:2026-11-08 06:02各信源进度 →

统计口径与数据新鲜度

统计 2026-11-07 17:50 — 2026-11-08 17:50(北京时间) · 点击数字查看对应简报;AI 相关包含在新增论文内。

最近完成检查:2026-11-08 17:39最近发现新增版本:2026-11-08 06:02库内论文最新更新时间:2026-11-06 02:59

每分钟刷新已保存的数据。空检查不代表采集异常;新收录可能包含历史论文。AI 导读按新增版本计数。

17,100 已收录论文14,661 AI 相关4,057 有修订112 HF 社区发现

浏览论文库

时间范围跟随排序:版本更新、本站收录或首次发表。最新收录可能包含历史论文。部分信源异常,查看状态 →

找到 1 篇论文 · 按版本更新时间排序上轮扫描起点 2026-11-08 17:37(北京时间)
版本更新 · v2arXiv:2609.13235

Pose accuracy is not grasp reliability: residual pose posteriors improve simulated robotic grasp planning

Md Selim Sarowar, Sungho Kim

原文摘要

Model-based robotic grasping estimates an object's six-dimensional (6D) pose and plans on its mesh as if that pose were exact. We show that this assumption reduces simulated grasp success even when the pose passes the standard accuracy test. We built LM-Grasp, a benchmark of 15{,}800 real LINEMOD RGB-D images with grasp outcomes simulated on scanned meshes. FoundationPose meets the ADD(-S) criterion (mean model-point error below 10\% of the object diameter) on 0.997 of test scenes, yet planning on its estimate succeeds in 0.791 of scenes, compared with 0.856 using the annotated pose. Because the estimator reports no uncertainty, we build a pose posterior from its own errors on annotated training frames, resampled from frames with similar observable fit, and score each grasp by its mean success across sampled poses and four equally weighted physics scenarios. Without retraining the estimator, posterior planning yields 0.859 (difference from the annotated-pose result +0.003; 95\% scene-wise paired-bootstrap interval [$-$0.003, +0.009]). This interval is compatible with no difference and a small shortfall; we did not conduct an equivalence test. For pose errors of 5 to 10\% of the diameter, simulated success rises from 0.796 to 0.984. Among test scenes assigned singleton-success conformal prediction sets, observed held-out precision is 0.972, compared with 0.904 for the point-estimate planner; these are empirical precision estimates, not conditional guarantees. On occluded LM-O scenes never used for tuning, posterior planning closes 66\% of the gap to the annotated pose.

cs.RO · cs.CV