Jan Peters

RO
h-index6
3papers
16citations
Novelty33%
AI Score28

3 Papers

8.1ROJun 1, 2022
Active Inference for Robotic Manipulation

Tim Schneider, Boris Belousov, Hany Abdulsamad et al.

Robotic manipulation stands as a largely unsolved problem despite significant advances in robotics and machine learning in the last decades. One of the central challenges of manipulation is partial observability, as the agent usually does not know all physical properties of the environment and the objects it is manipulating in advance. A recently emerging theory that deals with partial observability in an explicit manner is Active Inference. It does so by driving the agent to act in a way that is not only goal-directed but also informative about the environment. In this work, we apply Active Inference to a hard-to-explore simulated robotic manipulation tasks, in which the agent has to balance a ball into a target zone. Since the reward of this task is sparse, in order to explore this environment, the agent has to learn to balance the ball without any extrinsic feedback, purely driven by its own curiosity. We show that the information-seeking behavior induced by Active Inference allows the agent to explore these challenging, sparse environments systematically. Finally, we conclude that using an information-seeking objective is beneficial in sparse environments and allows the agent to solve tasks in which methods that do not exhibit directed exploration fail.

12.3ROJun 3, 2025Code
Tactile MNIST: Benchmarking Active Tactile Perception

Tim Schneider, Guillaume Duret, Cristiana de Farias et al.

Tactile perception has the potential to significantly enhance dexterous robotic manipulation by providing rich local information that can complement or substitute for other sensory modalities such as vision. However, because tactile sensing is inherently local, it is not well-suited for tasks that require broad spatial awareness or global scene understanding on its own. A human-inspired strategy to address this issue is to consider active perception techniques instead. That is, to actively guide sensors toward regions with more informative or significant features and integrate such information over time in order to understand a scene or complete a task. Both active perception and different methods for tactile sensing have received significant attention recently. Yet, despite advancements, both fields lack standardized benchmarks. To bridge this gap, we introduce the Tactile MNIST Benchmark Suite, an open-source, Gymnasium-compatible benchmark specifically designed for active tactile perception tasks, including localization, classification, and volume estimation. Our benchmark suite offers diverse simulation scenarios, from simple toy environments all the way to complex tactile perception tasks using vision-based tactile sensors. Furthermore, we also offer a comprehensive dataset comprising 13,500 synthetic 3D MNIST digit models and 153,600 real-world tactile samples collected from 600 3D printed digits. Using this dataset, we train a CycleGAN for realistic tactile simulation rendering. By providing standardized protocols and reproducible evaluation frameworks, our benchmark suite facilitates systematic progress in the fields of tactile sensing and active perception.

3.2ROMay 19, 2025
Investigating Active Sampling for Hardness Classification with Vision-Based Tactile Sensors

Junyi Chen, Alap Kshirsagar, Frederik Heller et al.

One of the most important object properties that humans and robots perceive through touch is hardness. This paper investigates information-theoretic active sampling strategies for sample-efficient hardness classification with vision-based tactile sensors. We evaluate three probabilistic classifier models and two model-uncertainty-based sampling strategies on a robotic setup as well as on a previously published dataset of samples collected by human testers. Our findings indicate that the active sampling approaches, driven by uncertainty metrics, surpass a random sampling baseline in terms of accuracy and stability. Additionally, while in our human study, the participants achieve an average accuracy of 48.00%, our best approach achieves an average accuracy of 88.78% on the same set of objects, demonstrating the effectiveness of vision-based tactile sensors for object hardness classification.