Page 2 of 3

Re: How do you evaluate whether a grasp policy is overfit to its training object set?

Posted: Fri Jan 02, 2026 4:43 pm
by ivan22
One nitpick - Wet, oily, or otherwise low-friction objects are still a genuine edge case for most current hands, since tactile sensing and grasp-force controllers are typically tuned and validated on dry, higher-friction test objects.

Re: How do you evaluate whether a grasp policy is overfit to its training object set?

Posted: Sun Jan 04, 2026 9:31 am
by zoeanderson
Minor factual note: Underactuated hands (fewer actuators than joints, using mechanical coupling to shape the grasp) are a reasonable engineering compromise for robust power grasps on a budget, but they generally can't do fine in-hand manipulation the way a fully actuated hand can.

Re: How do you evaluate whether a grasp policy is overfit to its training object set?

Posted: Tue Jan 06, 2026 5:45 am
by wei_ross
Counterpoint: Underactuated hands (fewer actuators than joints, using mechanical coupling to shape the grasp) are a reasonable engineering compromise for robust power grasps on a budget, but they generally can't do fine in-hand manipulation the way a fully actuated hand can. Totally unrelated but has anyone else noticed how fast component costs are dropping this year.

Re: How do you evaluate whether a grasp policy is overfit to its training object set?

Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2026 1:01 am
by benjaminsanchez
@wei_ross Genuinely curious - Bimanual manipulation - two arms coordinating on one task - is harder than it looks mostly because of the added degrees of freedom and the timing/force coordination required; a lot of 'two-handed' demos are actually closer to two independent single-hand tasks done in sequence.

Re: How do you evaluate whether a grasp policy is overfit to its training object set?

Posted: Mon Jan 26, 2026 12:34 am
by kwilliams
@benjaminsanchez Agreed, and I'd add: Compliant wrists that absorb impact during a bad approach or misjudged contact reduce mechanical stress on the whole arm, which matters a lot for long-term reliability even though it's a less visible feature than the hand itself. Reminds me a bit of the early drone hobbyist scene, honestly.

Re: How do you evaluate whether a grasp policy is overfit to its training object set?

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2026 3:12 am
by jwang
Thanks for laying this out, genuinely useful. Grasp planning for deformable or non-rigid objects (bags, cables, cloth) remains one of the genuinely unsolved problems in manipulation - rigid-body grasp models simply don't capture how the object will behave once contact starts. Wet, oily, or otherwise low-friction objects are still a genuine edge case for most current hands, since tactile sensing and grasp-force controllers are typically tuned and validated on dry, higher-friction test objects.

Re: How do you evaluate whether a grasp policy is overfit to its training object set?

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2026 6:58 pm
by benjaminsanchez
Just to be precise about one thing: Vision-based grasp confidence estimation (predicting success before attempting a grasp) and tactile-based confirmation (confirming after contact) are complementary rather than competing - vision helps you choose a grasp, tactile tells you if it actually worked. Compliant wrists that absorb impact during a bad approach or misjudged contact reduce mechanical stress on the whole arm, which matters a lot for long-term reliability even though it's a less visible feature than the hand itself.

Re: How do you evaluate whether a grasp policy is overfit to its training object set?

Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2026 5:20 am
by james15
@benjaminsanchez Not sure I fully agree here. Cable routing through a wrist joint with multiple degrees of freedom is a genuinely tricky mechanical design problem - tendons and wiring both need enough slack to avoid binding through the full range of motion without tangling or fraying over thousands of cycles.

Re: How do you evaluate whether a grasp policy is overfit to its training object set?

Posted: Sun Mar 01, 2026 1:45 pm
by emma_whit
Minor factual note: Compliant wrists that absorb impact during a bad approach or misjudged contact reduce mechanical stress on the whole arm, which matters a lot for long-term reliability even though it's a less visible feature than the hand itself. Palm sensing gets less attention than fingertip sensing, but a lot of power grasps (holding a box, a tool handle) rely more on palm and lateral finger contact than fingertip contact, so under-sensing the palm can leave a real blind spot in grasp confidence.

Re: How do you evaluate whether a grasp policy is overfit to its training object set?

Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2026 7:41 pm
by carol.robinson
Here's what I know on this: Wet, oily, or otherwise low-friction objects are still a genuine edge case for most current hands, since tactile sensing and grasp-force controllers are typically tuned and validated on dry, higher-friction test objects. A lot of the manipulation shown in production demos still leans heavily on teleoperation, particularly for anything involving fine force control or novel objects - autonomous grasp success rates on genuinely unstructured, previously-unseen clutter are still well below what teleoperation can achieve.