EDBT 2026 Demo / reviewers in the wild / expert
Carl Winge
dblp:359/0532
· DBLP profile ↗
1ranked-venue papers
0as first author
1since 2021 · last 2024
—ORCID · none
Domains — the database's venue-derived domains; a paper can count in several
Artificial intelligence and machine learning · 1 · 1 since 2021Systems, architecture and hardware · 1 · 1 since 2021
Expertise — from the expertise taxonomy: the topics of the expert's papers under the CCF categories. A weight counts papers with recency: 1 for a paper about the topic, 0.3 when the topic is its context, halved every five years.
| Artificial intelligence
1 paper |
Robot manipulation · 61% Motion planning and robot control · 30% Representation and self-supervised learning · 9% |
Topics — the 4 heaviest of 5, each with the papers that count most for it
| Topic | Weight | Papers | Last | Evidence papers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Robotics › Robot manipulation
grasping |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Evaluating Robustness of Visual Representations for Object Assembly Task Requiring Spatio-Geometrical Reasoning · ICRA 2024 |
Robotics › Robot manipulation › assembly
peg-in-hole insertion |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Evaluating Robustness of Visual Representations for Object Assembly Task Requiring Spatio-Geometrical Reasoning · ICRA 2024 |
Robotics › Motion planning and robot control › robot learning › visuomotor learning
visuomotor policy learning |
0.8 | 1 | 2024 | Evaluating Robustness of Visual Representations for Object Assembly Task Requiring Spatio-Geometrical Reasoning · ICRA 2024 |
Machine learning › Representation and self-supervised learning › representation learning
visual representation learning |
0.2 | 1 | 2024 | Evaluating Robustness of Visual Representations for Object Assembly Task Requiring Spatio-Geometrical Reasoning · ICRA 2024 |
Methods — techniques the papers use, named apart from their topics
visuomotor policy learning · 0.8visual pre-training · 0.8rotation representation · 0.8
| Year | Publication | Venue | Position |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2024 | Evaluating Robustness of Visual Representations for Object Assembly Task Requiring Spatio-Geometrical ReasoningabstractThis paper primarily focuses on evaluating and benchmarking the robustness of visual representations in the context of object assembly tasks. Specifically, it investigates the alignment and insertion of objects with geometrical extrusions, commonly referred to as a peg-in-hole task. The accuracy required to detect and orient the peg and the hole geometry in SE(3) space for successful assembly poses significant challenges. Addressing this, we employ a general framework in visuomotor policy learning that utilizes visual pretraining models as vision encoders. Our study investigates the robustness of this framework when applied to a dual-arm manipulation setup, specifically to the grasp variations. Our quantitative analysis shows that existing pretrained models fail to capture the essential visual features necessary for this task: a visual encoder trained from scratch consistently outperforms the frozen pre-trained models. Moreover, we discuss rotation representations and associated loss functions that substantially improve policy learning. We present a novel task scenario designed to evaluate the progress in visuomotor policy learning, with a specific focus on improving the robustness of intricate assembly tasks that require both geometrical and spatial reasoning. Videos, additional experiments, dataset, and code are available at https://sites.google.com/view/geometric-peg-in-hole. Chahyon Ku, Carl Winge, Ryan Diaz, Karthik Desingh |
ICRA | 2 |