Enhancing Vision-Based Policies with Omni-View and Cross-Modality Knowledge Distillation for Mobile Robots
Authors: Kai Li, Shiyu Zhao
Organizations: College of Computer Science and Technology at Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China. · School of Engineering at Westlake University, Hangzhou, China.
Vision-based policies are widely applied in robotics for tasks such as manipulation and locomotion. On lightweight mobile robots, however, they face a trilemma of limited scene transferability, restricted onboard computation resources, and sensor hardware cost. To address these issues, we propose a knowledge distillation approach that transfers knowledge from an information-rich, appearance invariant omniview depth policy to a lightweight monocular policy. The key idea is to train the student not only to mimic the expert actions but also to align with the latent embeddings of the omni view depth teacher. Experiments demonstrate that omni-view and depth inputs improve the scene transfer and navigation performance, and that the proposed distillation method enhances the performance of a singleview monocular policy, compared with policies solely imitating actions. Real world experiments further validate the effectiveness and practicality of our approach. Code will be released publicly.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: The teacher policy (left) leverages appearance-invariant omnidirectional depth images generated by concatenating multi-view inputs, while the student (right) relies on a single-view RGB image. Both the teacher and the student imitate the action a from the expert data, with the student additionally distilling the feature embedding z from the teacher. Compared to the teacher, the student policy is computationally lightweight and more suitable for deployment on lightweight low-cost mobile robots.
Fig. 2: Overview of the proposed method. (a) shows the knowledge transfer flow from the state-based expert, to the omnidirectional-depth-based teacher, and the RGB-based student. (b) shows the detailed pipeline of our method. In contrast with the vanilla form of IL, our method imitates both the action output and intermediate visual embeddings, which is highlighted in the dash-line boxes. LP in the teacher denotes linear projection, which is used for embedding dimension matching.
Fig. 3: Omnidirectional RGB and depth images from DATv2. The top row shows the simulation and the bottom row shows the real world. Omni-view is formed by concatenating multi-camera images. Camera 1 is used for the single-view student policy.
Fig. 4: Embedding similarity comparison of different image encoders across scenes. Higher similarity values indicate more consistent embeddings and stronger scene transferability. μ is the mean value of similarity.
Fig. 5: t-SNE [ 30 ] visualization of visual embeddings of different scenes from DINOv2 [ 31 ] , Zhang et al. [ 12 ] and ours. Different colors represent different scenes.
Fig. 6: The rows show (a) RGB images, (b) depth images, (c) Full Gradient [ 32 ] (FG) attention maps from a policy trained directly on RGB, and (d) FG attention maps from a policy trained with our knowledge distillation method. The attention maps in row (c) are distracted by irrelevant features. In contrast, the maps in row (d) align more with human intuition, consistently focusing on obstacles when they are nearby. The columns show different simulation and real-world scenes. The encoder backbones of (c) and (d) are both Resnet50.
Method
Modality
View
Finetuned
AE Train ↓
AE Test ↓
Resnet18 [ 27 ]
RGB
Omni
✗
0.0038
0.0226
Resnet18 [ 27 ]
RGB
Single
✗
0.0051
0.0734
Resnet50 [ 27 ]
RGB
Omni
✗
0.0027
0.0093
Resnet50 [ 27 ]
RGB
Single
✗
0.0042
0.0112
DINOv2 [ 31 ]
RGB
Omni
✗
0.0030
0.0097
DINOv2 [ 31 ]
RGB
Single
✗
0.0049
0.0129
TABLE I: White rows show action error results for methods without embedding distillation, using different input modalities and camera views. Gray rows show results with the proposed knowledge distillation method. Finetuned indicates that the encoder is further trained on our custom robot dataset, while non-finetuned encoders use frozen weights pretrained on a large-scale public dataset.
Method
Modality
View
Finetuned
AE ↓
SR (%) ↑
MD (m) ↓
#Parameters
Encoder Time (ms) ↓
DATv2 Time (ms)
Resnet18 [ 27 ]
RGB
Single
✗
0.0739
31.0
4.08 ± 0.34
11.7M
16.51 (26.64)
-
Resnet18 [ 27 ]
RGB
Omni
✗
0.0479
40.0
5.19 ± 0.42
11.7M
21.36 (29.54)
-
Resnet18 [ 27 ]
Depth
Single
✓
0.0050
69.0
8.28 ± 0.33
11.7M
10.15 (17.62)
25.69 (34.88)
Resnet18 [ 27 ]
Depth
Omni
✓
0.0037
74.0
8.94 ± 0.31
11.7M
12.20 (19.90)
54.97 (82.20)
Resnet50 [ 27 ]
RGB
Single
✗
0.0229
38.0
5.35 ± 0.21
23.5M
24.10 (33.81)
-
Resnet50 [ 27 ]
RGB
Omni
✗
0.0115
49.0
7.09 ± 0.30
23.5M
45.34 (58.78)
-
TABLE II: Results for the robot navigation task. All onboard models are accelerated with NVIDIA TensorRT using FP16 precision. For a fair comparison, all policies incorporate temporal information using an LSTM with the same sequence length of 5. The table reports Action Error (AE), Success Rate (SR), and Moving Distance (MD). The onboard time is presented as the mean, with the 99% percentile shown in parentheses. The latency of the raw image is around 30 ms. For methods using depth as input, the inference time of DATv2 must be included in the total latency.
Method
AE (Train) ↓
AE (Test) ↓
SR % ↑
MD (m) ↑
RoboSaGA [ 5 ]
0.0088
0.0301
47.0
5.59 ± 0.51
VISARL [ 14 ]
0.0095
0.0295
40.0
5.02 ± 0.47
Zhang et al. [ 12 ]
0.0054
0.0082
62.0
8.30 ± 0.22
Ours-Rnet50
0.0021
0.0067
72.0
8.49 ± 0.25
TABLE III: Comparison with other methods in the literature that focus on enhancing the performance of visuomotor policies.
Fig. 7: Typical experiment trajectories of robots under policies trained with different strategies and input modalities. The target is moving in a circle (Yellow trajectory). SV denotes single-view image input, and OV denotes omni-view image input.
Fig. 8: Robot trajectories in real-world experiment. The white is the robot and the red is the dynamic target.
Autonomous Systems, Technische Universitaet Wien (TU Wien), Vienna, Austria · Institute of Robotics and Mechatronics (DLR), German Aerospace Center, Wessling, Germany