@pushpak_agr@babugi28@microagi@MeckaAI yeah we would need thousands of trials to get something statistically significant. We never claimed statistical significance. We are simply showing our results from our experiments and showing the competitiveness of Human Archive data.
@pushpak_agr@babugi28@microagi@MeckaAI Sampling was random episodes from egoverse. 100 hours is the same order of size as VITRA's own pretraining dataset. training was identical for each arm, 20k steps at batch 512, around 1 pass over each 100h.
We pre-trained the same VLA on 100 hours of Human Archive’s OTS dataset and 100 hours of randomly sampled data from each of @microagi’s and @MeckaAI’s datasets on EgoVerse.
Overall, Human Archive data achieved the strongest results, with the highest overall task success rate. We observed particularly strong generalization to unseen objects.
Thread below 🧵👇
We benchmarked only 7 hours of Human Archive data against 4 widely used public datasets totaling 17 hours: HOT3D, H2O, HOI4D, and TACO.
The results:
Human Archive only: 85% task success | 65.6% task progress
4 public datasets: 57.5% task success | 52.5% task progress
Mixture of all 5: 60% task success | 56.3% task progress
We benchmarked only 7 hours of Human Archive data against 4 widely used public datasets totaling 17 hours: HOT3D, H2O, HOI4D, and TACO.
The results:
Human Archive only: 85% task success | 65.6% task progress
4 public datasets: 57.5% task success | 52.5% task progress
Mixture of all 5: 60% task success | 56.3% task progress