Skip to content

Paper: force-vs-pose decomposition, data-matched ALL, and leave-one-robot-out#10

Merged
5 commits merged into
mainfrom
user/ishneet-paper-edits
Jul 14, 2026
Merged

Paper: force-vs-pose decomposition, data-matched ALL, and leave-one-robot-out#10
5 commits merged into
mainfrom
user/ishneet-paper-edits

Conversation

@Ishneet0710

@Ishneet0710 Ishneet0710 commented Jul 12, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Adds three experiments to the analysis and tightens the claims they bear on. Paper-only; 2 signed commits; compiles clean.

New experiments (5-seed):

  • Force isolated from TCP pose (Sec. 4.5): the end-effector probe is decomposed into force (F/T) and pose. Force-only R2 is 0.05 / ~0 / 0.19 (flexiv/ur5/kuka); pose-only (0.31-0.53) dominates the aggregate. The fused vision-only latent beats raw ViT and a compute-matched vision-only control on force (paired t, p<=0.012); the pose-partialled residual is ~0. New table.
  • Data-budget-matched ALL (Sec. 4.5): ALL is retrained on a random subset equal to the mean specialist's training size (same epochs). It trails each specialist on-diagonal by 0.02-0.05 but still beats every specialist off its training robot, so the shared-encoder coverage reflects embodiment diversity rather than data volume. New table.
  • Leave-one-robot-out (Sec. 7): each robot is probed by an encoder trained only on the other three. Zero-shot to the unseen robot does not beat raw ViT on motor (-0.03 to -0.13), so the single-encoder result covers the robots in the training mix, not unseen embodiments. Added as a limitation. New table.

Wording:

  • Sec. 3.2: force is directly sensed by the wrist F/T sensor (an instantaneous state variable), not differentiated from position; velocity and acceleration are true time-derivatives and out of scope for the single-timestep model.
  • Abstract, findings, and conclusion: replace "recovers force ... substantially better" with the decomposed, precise wording.

…orce-is-sensed)

Q1/Q5 (sec:problem): force is a directly sensed instantaneous state variable (wrist F/T sensor), not differentiated from position; velocity/acceleration are true time-derivatives, out of scope for the single-timestep model.

Q4 (sec:ablations): new 'Force isolated from TCP pose' study + table tab:forceonly. Force-only R2 0.05/~0/0.19 (flexiv/ur5/kuka); ee probe is pose-dominated (pose-only 0.41/0.31/0.53). Fused z_v beats raw ViT AND a compute-matched vision-only control on all three (5-seed paired t, p<=0.012); pose-partialled residual is ~0, i.e. recoverable force is pose-entangled at one timestep.

Q2 (sec:ablations): new 'Data-budget-matched ALL' study + table tab:matched. Matched to a specialist's 32870-frame budget, ALL trails on-diagonal by 0.02-0.05 but still beats every specialist OFF its training robot -> embodiment coverage is diversity, not data volume.

Reworded abstract, phase1 findings, and conclusion from 'recovers force ... substantially better' to the decomposed, honest version. Leave-one-robot-out (Q3) to follow in a second commit.
… embodiments

sec:discussion: new paragraph + table tab:loro. Zero-shot LORO (train on 3 robots, probe the held-out 4th, 5-seed): the vision-only latent trails raw ViT on the held-out robot's motor probe by 0.03-0.13 (flexiv/ur5/kuka), so embodiment-agnosticism holds only for robots in the training mix, not zero-shot to unseen ones. Nuances: far more stable than raw on degenerate franka (-0.46 vs -6.71); ur5 force/ee zero-shot beats raw (+0.06). Framed as limitation + future work.
@Ishneet0710 Ishneet0710 changed the title Paper: address reviewer feedback (force-vs-pose, matched ALL, LORO) Paper: force-vs-pose decomposition, data-matched ALL, and leave-one-robot-out Jul 12, 2026
@Ishneet0710 Ishneet0710 requested a review from Yip-Jia-Qi July 12, 2026 16:09
Yip-Jia-Qi and others added 3 commits July 13, 2026 12:45
It's Phase-2 (future-work) design and broke the flow of a single-timestep paper. Moved the subsection + its figure to a new appendix section 'Continuous-time, multi-rate extension (planned)', keeping the sec:temporal/fig:temporal labels so all 9 cross-references still resolve. The Method now covers only the single-timestep model actually evaluated.
Reframe around the vision-sufficiency null (H0). Experiments now read good->useful: a two-act §5 (A good representation: transfer matrix; A useful representation: downstream, safety-first) followed by the controls (ablations). Promote/rename downstream from a buried section to the useful-representation subsection.

Declutter body to appendix: patch-feature PCA + attention maps (Interpretability probes), bottleneck/joint-SIGReg + triplet (Secondary ablations), the freeze-backbone preliminary, and the continuous-time extension (planned). Remove the franka-heavy transfer-matrix heatmap (tables kept).

Tighten prose to bold-run-in, concise paragraphs (Findings, downstream, Discussion); condense Data to four paragraphs; light-trim Related Work and the Method rationale. Rewrite Abstract/Intro/Contributions/Conclusion to lead with the latent + downstream-safety; drop the evaluation-protocol contribution; add series-positioning (action predictor + native-rate temporal as next steps).

Fix: define z_v in the problem formulation (was used before definition), typos (perceivable, end-effector), and a cite->citep. Compiles clean: 0 undefined refs/citations, 0 duplicate labels, 26pp.
@Yip-Jia-Qi Yip-Jia-Qi closed this pull request by merging all changes into main in 7eac3c2 Jul 14, 2026
@Ishneet0710 Ishneet0710 deleted the user/ishneet-paper-edits branch July 15, 2026 00:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants