Abstract
Grasp-feasibility predictors report near-perfect accuracy on Task and Motion Planning benchmarks, but high accuracy on these benchmarks does not verify that a predictor uses the collision geometry that the motion planner checks. We propose a planner-verified counterfactual (CF) test: holding the grasp pose fixed, we insert a solid obstacle into the approach corridor, add its points to the model input, and let a planner re-derive the label, which flips from feasible to infeasible. Across eight predictors spanning point clouds, voxels, depth, and object tokens, CF-pair AUROC falls from high natural AUROC (0.920-0.996) to chance (0.470-0.504), and the flip holds across four planners, two arms, and a real-object obstacle. Predictors fail at different resolutions, from a bounding box to a 12.5 cm voxel. In the point-cloud models we dissect, the obstacle either moves the representation in a direction unrelated to whether it blocks the grasp or is not registered at all. A clearance-aware read of the corridor points, trained on the unmodified benchmark with no counterfactual scenes, reaches 0.983 CF-pair AUROC, but it remains bound to its trained obstacle placements; a placement-invariant clearance representation is still open. We release the counterfactual labels, metrics, datasheet, and relabeling pipeline at this https URL.
Abstract (translated)
URL
https://arxiv.org/abs/2611.09130
