We present Interactive Gibson, the first comprehensive benchmark for training and evaluating Interactive Navigation: robot navigation strategies where physical interaction with objects is allowed and even encouraged to accomplish a task. The benchmark has two main components:
Screen shot of the simulator: (a) 3d view of the scene (b) RGB camera (c) surface normal (d) interactive objects mask (e) depth
Top down view of the scenes, green indicates objects that are replaced by CAD models.
In order to measure navigation performance we propose a novel score for a single navigation run which captures the following two aspects:
Path and Effort Efficiency are measured by scores, P_eff and E_eff , respectively, in the interval [0, 1]. The final metric, called Interactive Navigation Score or INS, captures both aspects aforementioned in a soft manner with a convex combination of Path and Effort Efficiency Scores:
To define the Effort Efficiency Score, we denote by m i the robot (i = 0) and objects masses. Further, G = m_0 g corresponds to the gravity force on the robot and F_t stands for the amount of force applied by the robot on the environment at time t ∈ [0, T ], excluding the forces applied to the floor for locomotion. The Effort Efficiency Score captures both the excess of displaced mass (kinematic effort) and the applied force (dynamic effort) for interactions:
Path Efficiency Score is defined as the ratio between the ideal shortest path length L∗ computed without any movable object in the environment, and the cumulative path taken by the robot, weighted by the success.
We train agents using different Reinforcement Learning algorithms: DDPG, SAC and PPO with different interaction penalty k_int.
Qualitative results of the trade-off between Path and Effort Efficiency.
Navigation behaviors of different interaction penalties
We compare INS_0.5 for navigation performance on test set. The best algorithm so far is SAC with interaction penalty of 0.1. New submissions are welcome!