SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2203.09475

CaRTS: Causality-driven Robot Tool Segmentation from Vision and Kinematics Data

Abstract

Vision-based segmentation of the robotic tool during robot-assisted surgery enables downstream applications, such as augmented reality feedback, while allowing for inaccuracies in robot kinematics. With the introduction of deep learning, many methods were presented to solve instrument segmentation directly and solely from images. While these approaches made remarkable progress on benchmark datasets, fundamental challenges pertaining to their robustness remain. We present CaRTS, a causality-driven robot tool segmentation algorithm, that is designed based on a complementary causal model of the robot tool segmentation task. Rather than directly inferring segmentation masks from observed images, CaRTS iteratively aligns tool models with image observations by updating the initially incorrect robot kinematic parameters through forward kinematics and differentiable rendering to optimize image feature similarity end-to-end. We benchmark CaRTS with competing techniques on both synthetic as well as real data from the dVRK, generated in precisely controlled scenarios to allow for counterfactual synthesis. On training-domain test data, CaRTS achieves a Dice score of 93.4 that is preserved well (Dice score of 91.8) when tested on counterfactually altered test data, exhibiting low brightness, smoke, blood, and altered background patterns. This compares favorably to Dice scores of 95.0 and 86.7, respectively, of the SOTA image-based method. Future work will involve accelerating CaRTS to achieve video framerate and estimating the impact occlusion has in practice. Despite these limitations, our results are promising: In addition to achieving high segmentation accuracy, CaRTS provides estimates of the true robot kinematics, which may benefit applications such as force estimation. Code is available at: https://github.com/hding2455/CaRTS

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

BibTeXRIS

Hao Ding, Jintan Zhang, Peter Kazanzides, Jie Ying Wu, Mathias Unberath. 2022-03-15. CaRTS: Causality-driven Robot Tool Segmentation from Vision and Kinematics Data. https://arxiv.org/abs/2203.09475

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