RB2: Robotic Manipulation Benchmarking with a Twist

TL;DR

RB2 introduces a novel benchmarking approach for robotic manipulation that combines state-of-the-art algorithms with a mechanism for pooling data across labs to establish a credible global ranking, enhancing reproducibility and comparability.

Contribution

The paper presents RB2, a new benchmarking framework that includes baseline implementations and a data pooling mechanism for reproducible, global ranking of robotic manipulation algorithms.

Findings

Simple open-loop baselines outperform complex models in some tasks

RB2 enables credible comparison across different labs

Surprising results challenge assumptions about model complexity

Abstract

Benchmarks offer a scientific way to compare algorithms using objective performance metrics. Good benchmarks have two features: (a) they should be widely useful for many research groups; (b) and they should produce reproducible findings. In robotic manipulation research, there is a trade-off between reproducibility and broad accessibility. If the benchmark is kept restrictive (fixed hardware, objects), the numbers are reproducible but the setup becomes less general. On the other hand, a benchmark could be a loose set of protocols (e.g. object sets) but the underlying variation in setups make the results non-reproducible. In this paper, we re-imagine benchmarking for robotic manipulation as state-of-the-art algorithmic implementations, alongside the usual set of tasks and experimental protocols. The added baseline implementations will provide a way to easily recreate SOTA numbers in a new local robotic setup, thus providing credible relative rankings between existing approaches and new work. However, these local rankings could vary between different setups. To resolve this issue, we build a mechanism for pooling experimental data between labs, and thus we establish a single global ranking for existing (and proposed) SOTA algorithms. Our benchmark, called Ranking-Based Robotics Benchmark (RB2), is evaluated on tasks that are inspired from clinically validated Southampton Hand Assessment Procedures. Our benchmark was run across two different labs and reveals several surprising findings. For example, extremely simple baselines like open-loop behavior cloning, outperform more complicated models (e.g. closed loop, RNN, Offline-RL, etc.) that are preferred by the field. We hope our fellow researchers will use RB2 to improve their research's quality and rigor.