GripperPose: A novel approach for large industrial grippers 5D pose estimation


Abstract

Object pose estimation remains a challenging task in computer vision, especially for facilitating robotic manipulation. In industrial scenarios involving large-scale grippers—such as those used in waste incineration, port operations, and steel smelting—traditional pose estimation methods often prove inadequate. Accurate estimation of the spatial operating pose of these grippers is essential for fault diagnosis and ensuring operational safety. However, existing pose estimation approaches are rarely applied in such environments, and directly transferring them often leads to domain adaptation issues due to complex backgrounds and the limited availability of depth information. Furthermore, representing the pose of rotationally symmetric grippers using conventional 6 degrees of freedom (DoF) introduces ambiguities, making precise estimation difficult. To address these challenges, this paper proposes GripperPose, a novel framework for 5D pose estimation specifically designed for large industrial grippers. The pose estimation task is redefined using a 5D representation, along with three new evaluation metrics tailored to the unique characteristics of rotationally symmetric objects. Additionally, we introduce Gripper10, a dedicated dataset for the 5D pose estimation of ten commonly used industrial grippers in waste-to-energy incineration plants. Experimental results demonstrate that GripperPose achieves strong robustness and adaptability in these complex industrial environments.
Ask to review this manuscript

Notes for potential reviewers

  • Volunteering is not a guarantee that you will be asked to review. There are many reasons: reviewers must be qualified, there should be no conflicts of interest, a minimum of two reviewers have already accepted an invitation, etc.
  • This is NOT OPEN peer review. The review is single-blind, and all recommendations are sent privately to the Academic Editor handling the manuscript. All reviews are published and reviewers can choose to sign their reviews.
  • What happens after volunteering? It may be a few days before you receive an invitation to review with further instructions. You will need to accept the invitation to then become an official referee for the manuscript. If you do not receive an invitation it is for one of many possible reasons as noted above.

  • PeerJ Computer Science does not judge submissions based on subjective measures such as novelty, impact or degree of advance. Effectively, reviewers are asked to comment on whether or not the submission is scientifically and technically sound and therefore deserves to join the scientific literature. Our Peer Review criteria can be found on the "Editorial Criteria" page - reviewers are specifically asked to comment on 3 broad areas: "Basic Reporting", "Experimental Design" and "Validity of the Findings".
  • Reviewers are expected to comment in a timely, professional, and constructive manner.
  • Until the article is published, reviewers must regard all information relating to the submission as strictly confidential.
  • When submitting a review, reviewers are given the option to "sign" their review (i.e. to associate their name with their comments). Otherwise, all review comments remain anonymous.
  • All reviews of published articles are published. This includes manuscript files, peer review comments, author rebuttals and revised materials.
  • Each time a decision is made by the Academic Editor, each reviewer will receive a copy of the Decision Letter (which will include the comments of all reviewers).

If you have any questions about submitting your review, please email us at [email protected].