跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2611.06673 · v1

Which Physical Tactile Cues Matter for Contact-Rich Imitation Learning? A Controlled Real-Robot Study

首次提交 2026-11-04 23:45
版本更新 2026-11-04 23:45
雷达观测 2026-11-05 12:13
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

Vision-based tactile sensors capture multiple aspects of physical interaction within a single image stream, including contact appearance, geometry, indentation depth, and tangential deformation. However, existing visuo-tactile policies often directly process tactile observations as images, making it difficult to determine which physical cues contribute to policy learning. This paper presents a controlled real-robot study that compares physically interpretable tactile signals using the LeRobot platform, enhanced with our visuo-tactile perception system. From the same tactile stream, we derive tactile RGB images, normal/depth maps, and marker-flow fields, representing contact appearance, geometry, and tangential deformation, respectively. Using identical task demonstrations and the same policy backbone, we evaluate the individual and combined contributions of these tactile cues. We further compare tactile encoders and visuo-tactile fusion strategies. Evaluation across 720 real-robot trials yields four key findings: (1) tactile perception substantially improves the overall success rate from 57.8% to 78.9%, although its contribution varies across task stages; (2) marker flow is the most effective individual cue, achieving a success rate of 74.4% and playing a particularly important role in regulating established contact; (3) cue-factorized encoding consistently improves performance, highlighting that different physical cues require tailored processing techniques; and (4) although the effectiveness of tactile fusion is task-dependent, cross-attention offers a lightweight solution with performance comparable to that of pretrained tactile encoders.

作者备注:6 pages, 5 figures, 2 tables. Accepted to IEEE ROBIO 2026

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v1 · 2026-11-04 23:45 · 最新观测版本

Which Physical Tactile Cues Matter for Contact-Rich Imitation Learning? A Controlled Real-Robot Study

Vision-based tactile sensors capture multiple aspects of physical interaction within a single image stream, including contact appearance, geometry, indentation depth, and tangential deformation. However, existing visuo-tactile policies often directly process tactile observations as images, making it difficult to determine which physical cues contribute to policy learning. This paper presents a controlled real-robot study that compares physically interpretable tactile signals using the LeRobot platform, enhanced with our visuo-tactile perception system. From the same tactile stream, we derive tactile RGB images, normal/depth maps, and marker-flow fields, representing contact appearance, geometry, and tangential deformation, respectively. Using identical task demonstrations and the same policy backbone, we evaluate the individual and combined contributions of these tactile cues. We further compare tactile encoders and visuo-tactile fusion strategies. Evaluation across 720 real-robot trials yields four key findings: (1) tactile perception substantially improves the overall success rate from 57.8% to 78.9%, although its contribution varies across task stages; (2) marker flow is the most effective individual cue, achieving a success rate of 74.4% and playing a particularly important role in regulating established contact; (3) cue-factorized encoding consistently improves performance, highlighting that different physical cues require tailored processing techniques; and (4) although the effectiveness of tactile fusion is task-dependent, cross-attention offers a lightweight solution with performance comparable to that of pretrained tactile encoders.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗