MultiDiffSense: Diffusion-Based Multi-Modal Visuo-Tactile Image Generation Conditioned on Object Shape and Contact Pose
Authors: Sirine Bhouri, Lan Wei, Jian-Qing Zheng, Dandan Zhang
Organizations: the Department of Bioengineering, Imperial-X Initiative, Imperial College London, London, United Kingdom. · CAMS-Oxford Institute, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom.
Acquiring aligned visuo-tactile datasets is slow and costly, requiring specialised hardware and large-scale data collection. Synthetic generation is promising, but prior methods are typically single-modality, limiting cross-modal learning. We present MultiDiffSense, a unified diffusion model that synthesises images for multiple vision-based tactile sensors (ViTac, TacTip, ViTacTip) within a single architecture. Our approach uses dual conditioning on CAD-derived, pose-aligned depth maps and structured prompts that encode sensor type and 4-DoF contact pose, enabling controllable, physically consistent multi-modal synthesis. Evaluating on 8 objects (5 seen, 3 novel) and unseen poses, MultiDiffSense outperforms a Pix2Pix cGAN baseline in SSIM by +36.3% (ViTac), +134.6% (ViTacTip), and +64.7% (TacTip). For downstream 3-DoF pose estimation, mixing 50% synthetic with 50% real halves the required real data while maintaining competitive performance. MultiDiffSense alleviates the data-collection bottleneck in tactile sensing and enables scalable, controllable multi-modal dataset generation for robotic applications.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1 : Framework Overview. The model takes a CAD file and textual prompt as inputs. The CAD model is converted into a pose-aligned depth map (control image) fed via zero-convolutions into the ControlNet branch as the geometric condition. The text prompt is encoded with CLIP and injected into the UNet via cross-attention. The decoder then refines the latents based on both conditions to generate an image reflecting the desired object geometry, contact pose, and sensor modality.
Fig. 2 : Control Image Processing Pipeline. The pipeline takes an STL file, target image and a CSV log of end-effector poses (pose annotations) as inputs and consists of four stages: (1) Use STL file to render depth map and preprocess it to extract clean object masks; (2) Align robot coordinates to image pixels via centroid mapping; (3) Scale XY translations using workspace calibration, Incorporate Z-axis depth through geometric scaling and intensity modulation, and Apply yaw rotation using 2D rotation matrices; (4) Centre alignment error is minimised to < 5 pixels ( ≈ 0.6 mm)
Metric
Model
ViTac
ViTacTip
TacTip
SSIM ↑
MultiDiffSense
0.919 ± 0.022
0.877 ± 0.024
0.768 ± 0.058
Pix2Pix cGAN
0.678 ± 0.028
0.362 ± 0.015
0.450 ± 0.012
PSNR ↑
MultiDiffSense
28.27 ± 3.10
25.74 ± 2.06
22.61 ± 2.33
Pix2Pix cGAN
20.57 ± 0.92
17.38 ± 0.242
14.87 ± 0.28
MSE ↓
MultiDiffSense
0.002 ± 0.003
0.003 ± 0.002
0.006 ± 0.004
Pix2Pix cGAN
0.009 ± 0.003
0.018 ± 0.001
0.033 ± 0.002
TABLE I : Seen objects, unseen poses: performance across tactile modalities (ViTac, ViTacTip, TacTip). We compare MultiDiffSense (single unified model) with Pix2Pix cGAN (separate per modality). Metrics are mean±std; ↑/↓ denote higher-/lower-better; best per metric–modality in bold.
Metric
Model
ViTac
ViTacTip
TacTip
SSIM ↑
MultiDiffSense
0.912 ± 0.013
0.835 ± 0.030
0.741 ± 0.066
Pix2Pix cGAN
0.669 ± 0.015
0.356 ± 0.012
0.450 ± 0.012
PSNR ↑
MultiDiffSense
27.314 ± 2.146
23.530 ± 1.608
21.296 ± 2.575
Pix2Pix cGAN
20.165 ± 0.462
17.163 ± 0.217
14.871 ± 0.271
MSE ↓
MultiDiffSense
0.002 ± 0.001
0.005 ± 0.002
0.009 ± 0.006
Pix2Pix cGAN
0.009 ± 0.001
0.019 ± 0.001
0.033 ± 0.002
TABLE II : Quantitative results on unseen objects across three tactile modalities (ViTac, ViTacTip, TacTip). Best per metric–modality in bold.
Fig. 4 : Visualisation of image generation result on unseen objects across three tactile sensor modalities (ViTacTip, ViTac, TacTip). Red dashed boxes highlight regions where the methods differ: MultiDiffSense better preserves contact geometry, marker patterns, and lighting.
Modality
Component
Real Dataset
Mixed Dataset
Synthetic Dataset
MSE ↓
RMSE ↓
MAE ↓
R² ↑
MSE ↓
RMSE ↓
MAE ↓
R² ↑
MSE ↓
RMSE ↓
MAE ↓
R² ↑
TacTip
X
3.607
1.899
1.500
0.610
4.333
2.081
1.636
0.532
6.182
2.486
1.992
0.332
Z
0.066
0.258
0.221
0.789
0.028
0.166
0.129
0.912
0.279
0.528
0.475
0.112
θz
42.527
6.521
5.532
0.982
221.682
14.889
5.700
0.907
602.863
24.553
13.818
0.748
ViTac
X
0.183
0.428
0.309
0.980
0.131
0.361
0.280
0.986
0.903
0.950
0.761
0.902
Z
0.068
0.261
0.213
0.782
0.051
0.226
0.183
0.837
0.594
0.770
0.689
-0.893
TABLE III : Pose estimation performance comparison across sensor modalities and training dataset types. Mixed datasets achieve performance comparable to or superior to real-only training. Best results for each row (per component) for each metric are shown in bold.
Metric
Seen Objects
Unseen Objects
Control-only
Prompt + Control
Control-only
Prompt + Control
SSIM ↑
0.852 ± 0.001
0.853 ± 0.001
0.820 ± 0.001
0.812 ± 0.001
FID ↓
2.464 ± 0.050
2.021 ± 0.035
3.224 ± 0.274
3.866 ± 0.021
TABLE IV : Ablation 1: Impact of geometric Control (CAD-derived depth) on MultiDiffSense. Evaluated on seen objects–unseen poses and unseen objects . Best results are bolded. Metrics are mean ± std over three runs.
Metric
Seen Objects
Unseen Objects
Short Prompt (1)
Long Prompt (2)
Short Prompt (1)
Long Prompt (2)
SSIM ↑
0.8768
0.8394
0.8349
0.8069
PSNR ↑
25.74
23.91
23.53
22.24
MSE ↓
3.04E-03
4.53E-03
4.81E-03
6.29E-03
LPIPS ↓
0.0593
0.0765
0.0738
0.0893
FID ↓
2.212
2.1993
2.7982
3.5497
TABLE V : Ablation 2: Impact of prompt length on reconstruction quality for seen and unseen objects . Best results per case are bolded.
Fig. 5 : Effect of prompt length on reconstruction quality. Real vs Generated images by the two different model variants under the two testing scenarios (seen object but unseen poses and unseen objects).
Realistic physical interaction is a cornerstone of embodied intelligence, yet collecting paired visual--tactile data remains costly. Visual-to-tactile synthesis offers a promising approach to augmenting such data, but learning this mapping is complicated by the gap between visual appearance and contact-related material properties, as well as spatial misalignment in paired observations. To address these challenges, we present PhysTacGen, a visual-to-optical-tactile image generation framework that integrates material-aware descriptions with geometric conditioning. First, we introduce Group Tactile Policy Optimization (GTPO), a reinforcement learning strategy that refines a vision--language model to generate structured material descriptions using task-specific rewards. Second, we combine DINOv2-based pair curation with monocular relative-depth estimation to select training pairs and provide geometric priors. Finally, an SDXL ControlNet synthesizes optical tactile images conditioned on RGB, relative depth, and GTPO-generated text. Experiments on curated SSVTP data demonstrate improved structural similarity over the compared baselines, while a blinded user study shows a preference for GTPO-generated descriptions. Generated tactile inputs also improve performance on an attribute-derived force-coefficient prediction proxy. Together, these results demonstrate the effectiveness of PhysTacGen for optical tactile image synthesis and its utility in the evaluated downstream task.The code will be available at https://github.com/VDIGPKU/PhysTacGen.
Guo Tang, Yongtao Wang
Wangxuan Institute of Computer Technology, Peking University · VGI Labs Co., Ltd.
Unified multimodal models (UMMs) have shown great promise in integrating understanding and generation across diverse modalities. However, existing research rarely extends this paradigm to the tactile domain, where both object-level semantics and sensor-level configurations jointly determine the meaning of touch. To address this gap, we propose UniTac, the first UMM designed for tactile understanding and generation. UniTac models the tactile process as a transition from non-contact to contact, capturing the physical interaction between sensors and objects through a dual-level representation that encodes both sensor and object attributes. For tactile understanding, UniTac introduces two tasks, object property description and sensor identification, to enhance reasoning over physical and cross-sensor information. For tactile generation, we design a two-stage training paradigm consisting of reconstruction and alignment, together with a sensor-prior-based sampling strategy that simulates realistic tactile contact. Trained on large-scale multi-sensor datasets, UniTac achieves state-of-the-art performance in tactile understanding and generates realistic tactile signals across sensors.
Jiahang Tu, Fengyu Yang, Chenyang Ma +8
Zhejiang University · Yale University · UNIX AI +3
Vision-based tactile sensing is widely used in perception, reconstruction, and robotic manipulation, yet collecting large-scale tactile data remains costly due to diverse sensor-object interactions and inconsistencies across sensor instances. Existing approaches to scaling tactile data---simulation and free-form tactile generation---often yield unrealistically rendered signals with poor transfer to highly dynamic real-world tasks. We propose \name, a two-stage controllable tactile image generation framework that generates realistic tactile images conditioned on a single reference tactile image, contact force, and contact pose. By grounding generation in these important physical priors, \name synthesizes realistic samples across different sensors while effectively capturing task-relevant variations. Across a series of downstream tasks and real-world experiments, such as object insertion, imitation learning, and object weighting, the augmented datasets using our approach consistently improve performance and demonstrate practical utility in dynamic real-world settings. Project page: https://dongyuluo.github.io/controltac.
Dongyu Luo, Kelin Yu, Amir-Hossein Shahidzadeh +3
The University of Hong Kong · University of Maryland · University of Maryland, College Park