Papers › Comparing Task Simplifications to Learn Closed-Loop Object Picking Using Deep...

Comparing Task Simplifications to Learn Closed-Loop Object Picking Using Deep Reinforcement Learning

13 Mar 2018arXiv:1803.04996links table onlyarchive 2025-07-28

Michel Breyer, Fadri Furrer, Tonci Novkovic, Roland Siegwart, Juan Nieto

The archive published only this paper's code-link row. Authors, date and abstract are from arXiv's metadata (CC0), read from the Kaggle arXiv metadata snapshot of 2026-09-12 where its title matched the archive's; the title is the archive's.

Enabling autonomous robots to interact in unstructured environments with dynamic objects requires manipulation capabilities that can deal with clutter, changes, and objects' variability. This paper presents a comparison of different reinforcement learning-based approaches for object picking with a robotic manipulator. We learn closed-loop policies mapping depth camera inputs to motion commands and compare different approaches to keep the problem tractable, including reward shaping, curriculum learning and using a policy pre-trained on a task with a reduced action set to warm-start the full problem. For efficient and more flexible data collection, we train in simulation and transfer the policies to a real robot. We show that using curriculum learning, policies learned with a sparse reward formulation can be trained at similar rates as with a shaped reward. These policies result in success rates comparable to the policy initialized on the simplified task. We could successfully transfer these policies to the real robot with only minor modifications of the depth image filtering. We found that using a heuristic to warm-start the training was useful to enforce desired behavior, while the policies trained from scratch using a curriculum learned better to cope with unseen scenarios where objects are removed.

Code

Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.

Code Syntology ran Syntology

8 samples harvested; 0 ran; 0 honoured the contract we drafted; 8 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.

Licence: 0 of the 8 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.

Harvested from BarisYazici/deep-rl-grasping. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.

Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.

Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.

Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28

No leaderboard rows for this paper in the archive.

Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections