Bimanual Manipulation Within an 8 GB Budget: Zero-Copy Sensing and Quantized ACT on an Entry-Level Jetson
Ekansh Singh, Eva Samuel, Alessandra Reneau, Ryan Schmeelk, Yashvi Gandhi
Abstract
Bimanual manipulation policies trained with imitation learning are typically evaluated on workstation or datacenter-class GPUs, leaving the cost of deploying them on embedded hardware largely uncharacterized. We present a bimanual SO-101 system running entirely on an NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Super (8 GB), the entry-level tier of NVIDIA's embedded line, using a desktop GPU (RTX 3070) only for offline training, evaluated on pick-and-place of a deformable beanbag. First, we build a GStreamer capture pipeline backed by NVMM buffers that removes redundant host-device copies from three-camera sensing. Contrary to expectation, the conventional path fit the memory budget and dropped no frames; what zero-copy sensing recovers is CPU headroom (peak single-core utilization 98.0% to 77.0%) and worst-case latency (117.31 ms to 101.52 ms). Second, we train ACT and Diffusion Policy on identical demonstrations, each at its own reference budget (100k gradient steps for ACT, 200k for Diffusion Policy). ACT converges to a task-competent policy (19/20 trials) while Diffusion Policy does not converge to a usable one (0/10) even at twice the step count, which we attribute to differing convergence costs rather than an accuracy ceiling. Third, we convert ACT to TensorRT. FP16 reduces mean inference latency from 114.02 ms to 17.93 ms (6.4x) and INT8 to 12.65 ms (9.0x), with task success preserved at all three precisions (19/20, 18/20, 19/20). We report two findings not previously documented for ACT: TensorRT's general-purpose INT8 calibration quantizes the ResNet18 backbone but accepts zero of 145 transformer layers, explaining INT8's negligible size reduction over FP16 (0.9%) despite a further 28% latency gain; and the need for quantization is conditional on ACT's action-chunking configuration, feasible in full precision at nactionsteps = 100 but not at the per-step re-prediction temporal ensembling requires.
Create a lesson
Related papers
rMuscle: Robotic Muscle Memory for Efficient Vision-Language-Action Model Inference
Kaijun Zhou, Zhiyang Li, Le Chen et al.
ElastiQP: An Always-Feasible QP Solver for Constrained Robot Control
Daniel Morton, Jon Arrizabalaga, Zachary Manchester et al.
"What's going to happen after I'm gone?": Parent Perspectives on Technology in Supporting Independent Living for Adults with Intellectual Disabilities
Alexander Tyshka, Andrea Macklem-Zabel, Absalat Getachew et al.
Learning Holistic Whole-Body Loco-Manipulation with a Bipedal Mobile Manipulator
Zhongyu Chen, Yuxuan Nai, Qian Chen et al.
CaSCo: Cascade-Aware Soft-Collision Motion Planning
Shivaram Kumar, Gaoyuan Liu, Yoonchang Sung
Examining the Difference in Human Behavior Between Virtual and Real-World Human-Robot Teaming
Sean Dallas, Absalat Getachew, Motaz AbuHijleh et al.