arXiv ScienceSearch

arXiv · 2211.14652

Learning Bimanual Scooping Policies for Food Acquisition

Abstract

A robotic feeding system must be able to acquire a variety of foods. Prior bite acquisition works consider single-arm spoon scooping or fork skewering, which do not generalize to foods with complex geometries and deformabilities. For example, when acquiring a group of peas, skewering could smoosh the peas while scooping without a barrier could result in chasing the peas on the plate. In order to acquire foods with such diverse properties, we propose stabilizing food items during scooping using a second arm, for example, by pushing peas against the spoon with a flat surface to prevent dispersion. The added stabilizing arm can lead to new challenges. Critically, this arm should stabilize the food scene without interfering with the acquisition motion, which is especially difficult for easily breakable high-risk food items like tofu. These high-risk foods can break between the pusher and spoon during scooping, which can lead to food waste falling out of the spoon. We propose a general bimanual scooping primitive and an adaptive stabilization strategy that enables successful acquisition of a diverse set of food geometries and physical properties. Our approach, CARBS: Coordinated Acquisition with Reactive Bimanual Scooping, learns to stabilize without impeding task progress by identifying high-risk foods and robustly scooping them using closed-loop visual feedback. We find that CARBS is able to generalize across food shape, size, and deformability and is additionally able to manipulate multiple food items simultaneously. CARBS achieves 87.0% success on scooping rigid foods, which is 25.8% more successful than a single-arm baseline, and reduces food breakage by 16.2% compared to an analytical baseline. Videos can be found at https://sites.google.com/view/bimanualscoop-corl22/home .

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Jennifer Grannen, Yilin Wu, Suneel Belkhale, Dorsa Sadigh. 2022-11-26. Learning Bimanual Scooping Policies for Food Acquisition. https://arxiv.org/abs/2211.14652

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO