You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hi, thanks for the nice work. I am trying to rescale EGAD objects for grasping in the simulation. Indeed, object size (scale) is critical for grasping, as mentioned in IV.E of the paper.
I've seen a description of the scale used in the experiment.
Each object is scaled such that its minimum bounding box dimension is no more than 80% of the gripper width.
But according to the https://github.com/dougsm/egad/blob/master/scripts/prepare_meshes.py, the maximum dimension is first scaled to no more than the gripper width. It indicates chances are that a top-down grasping method can achieve high success rates regardless of shape complexity.
Can the authors clarify what kind of scaling strategies they actually use for the data generation and real-world experiments? Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hi, thanks for the nice work. I am trying to rescale EGAD objects for grasping in the simulation. Indeed, object size (scale) is critical for grasping, as mentioned in IV.E of the paper.
I've seen a description of the scale used in the experiment.
But according to the https://github.com/dougsm/egad/blob/master/scripts/prepare_meshes.py, the maximum dimension is first scaled to no more than the gripper width. It indicates chances are that a top-down grasping method can achieve high success rates regardless of shape complexity.
Can the authors clarify what kind of scaling strategies they actually use for the data generation and real-world experiments? Thanks.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: