Task data
Dexterous manipulation training data
Dexterous manipulation training data helps physical AI teams collect scoped examples in tools, small objects, drawers, fasteners, and deformables. When sourcing it, specify egocentric video, hand pose, tactile or glove signals, target volume, delivery format, rights, consent, and QA rules for finger visibility, contact phases, and precise task segmentation.
Quick facts
- Task
- Dexterous manipulation
- Modality
- egocentric video, hand pose, tactile or glove signals
- Environment
- tools, small objects, drawers, fasteners, and deformables
- Volume
- the buyer-approved target volume
- Format
- MCAP, HDF5, LeRobot, or synchronized video plus pose tracks
- QA
- finger visibility, contact phases, and precise task segmentation
Comparison
| Source | Use | Limitation |
|---|---|---|
| Public dataset | Research baseline | general egocentric datasets rarely include finger-level metadata or tactile context |
| Internal capture | Maximum control | Slow setup and high fixed cost |
| truelabel sourcing | Spec-matched supplier response | Requires clear acceptance criteria |
What to specify for dexterous manipulation
The sourcing request should define task boundaries, capture setting, actor or robot requirements, accepted modalities, MCAP, HDF5, LeRobot, or synchronized video plus pose tracks delivery expectations, rights, consent, and what counts as an accepted sample. Registry sources show that task data is only reusable when collection setup and task distribution are explicit [1]. Buyers should also pin delivery expectations to formats and documentation they can validate before scale [2].
Why public data is usually not enough
general egocentric datasets rarely include finger-level metadata or tactile context. Benchmark and vendor sources show that task labels, rights, and capture context are not interchangeable across deployments [3]. A buyer-specific request lets the team request the exact object set, environment, geography, and QA rubric needed for model training or evaluation.
Dexterous manipulation buyer scenario
A realistic dexterous manipulation request starts when a robotics team has a model behavior that fails in tools, small objects, drawers, fasteners, and deformables. The team does not just need more video; it needs examples where finger visibility, contact phases, and precise task segmentation can be verified repeatedly [4].
[5]"HOI4D provides dexterous hand-object interaction evidence for object manipulation tasks."
That means the supplier must show the requested egocentric video, hand pose, tactile or glove signals, prove the capture context, and deliver MCAP, HDF5, LeRobot, or synchronized video plus pose tracks in a way the buyer can test before scaling.
Dexterous manipulation sample acceptance criteria
A useful sample for dexterous manipulation dataset should include at least one accepted episode, one borderline or failed example, a complete metadata manifest, and a note explaining how the supplier would scale only to the buyer-approved target volume [6]. If the sample cannot show finger visibility, contact phases, and precise task segmentation, the buyer should reject it before funding a larger batch.
Dexterous manipulation task taxonomy and coverage
A dexterous manipulation dataset request should be task-specific, not template-level. Define the sub-tasks, capture viewpoints, object/environment coverage, labels, failure modes, and pilot acceptance rules before asking a supplier to scale. Accepted samples show fingertip visibility or a documented proxy, object orientation changes, and failure modes such as slip or misalignment.
| Planning area | Specify | QA question |
|---|---|---|
| Task phases | start/end boundaries, success, failure, recovery | Can reviewers identify every phase? |
| Sensors | wrist/external/egocentric video, state/action, depth/tactile if needed | Are streams synchronized and loadable? |
| Objects and environment | object family, layout, lighting, clutter, material | Does coverage match deployment? |
| Rights and provenance | license, consent, site permission, source manifest | Can legal/procurement audit the source? |
| Finger-level signal | finger joints, contact patches, occlusion | only palm-level motion is visible |
| In-hand state | roll, regrasp, slip, orientation change | object pose not tracked |
| Fine motor task | insert, turn, fold, pinch, press | taxonomy stops at generic pick/place |
Dexterous manipulation accepted and rejected examples
Dexterous pages should reject generic manipulation footage. If fingertips, in-hand object state, and small corrections are not visible or labeled, the data is unlikely to support dexterous policy learning. Use licensing/provenance review for human or workplace footage, and route robotics-ready requests through the robot training data marketplace once the pilot schema is clear.
Dexterous manipulation pilot manifest fields
For Dexterous manipulation, the pilot manifest should include task phase, environment, object or route class, camera/sensor keys, action/state fields when applicable, timestamps, outcome label, failure reason, reviewer decision, rights/provenance files, and the target delivery format. Accepted samples show fingertip visibility or a documented proxy, object orientation changes, and failure modes such as slip or misalignment. The manifest is the bridge between supplier footage and buyer QA: if a reviewer cannot reproduce why a sample passed or failed, the dataset is not ready for scale-up.
Public datasets as references, not drop-in commercial supply
Public robotics datasets can guide schema and benchmark expectations, but commercial use, embodiment fit, action-state coverage, and consent/provenance are dataset-specific. Treat them as references unless official terms and buyer review support the intended use.
Pilot package before scale-up
Require a small loadable pilot with raw media/logs, manifest, labels, accepted and rejected samples, consent/provenance artifacts, and validation in the target format. Reject missing fields, broken sync, unclear boundaries, unsupported rights, and samples with only clean successes. For warehouse, kitchen, or industrial variants, compare the nearest warehouse, kitchen, or industrial sourcing spec before scaling.
Related pages
Use these to move from category-level context into specific task, dataset, format, and comparison detail.
External references and source context
- Project site
BC-Z contributes multi-view visual observations for manipulation policy learning.
sites.google.com ↩ - NVIDIA GR00T N1 technical report
GR00T N1 frames humanoid manipulation data as multimodal robot training material.
arXiv ↩ - Google Research blog
RT-1 is a real-robot manipulation data reference for action-producing policies.
robotics-transformer1.github.io ↩ - Project site
Robosuite provides manipulation environments for contact-rich policy evaluation.
robosuite.ai ↩ - HOI4D: A 4D Egocentric Dataset for Category-Level Human-Object Interaction
HOI4D provides dexterous hand-object interaction evidence for object manipulation tasks.
hoi4d.github.io ↩ - LeRobot GitHub repository
LeRobot tooling can represent synchronized observations and actions for robot learning datasets.
GitHub ↩ - truelabel egocentric data glossary
Internal contextual link to the egocentric data definition.
truelabel.ai - truelabel sourcing brief intake
Internal contextual link to Truelabel's sourcing intake workflow.
truelabel.ai - truelabel VLA training data sourcing
Internal contextual link to VLA training data sourcing.
truelabel.ai - truelabel warehouse robotics data sourcing
Internal contextual link to warehouse robotics data sourcing.
truelabel.ai - truelabel kitchen manipulation data sourcing
Internal contextual link to kitchen manipulation data sourcing.
truelabel.ai - truelabel LeRobot format guide
Internal contextual link to the LeRobot format guide.
truelabel.ai - truelabel LeRobot dataset alternative comparison
Internal contextual link to the LeRobot dataset alternative comparison.
truelabel.ai - truelabel eval data for robotics hub
Internal contextual link to robotics eval data sourcing.
truelabel.ai - truelabel teleoperation training-data page
Internal contextual link to teleoperation training data sourcing.
truelabel.ai - truelabel robot demonstrations training-data page
Internal contextual link to robot demonstration training data sourcing.
truelabel.ai - truelabel hand-object interaction data page
Internal contextual link to hand-object interaction training data requirements.
truelabel.ai - truelabel egocentric video datasets hub
Internal contextual link to the egocentric video datasets hub.
truelabel.ai
FAQ
What is dexterous manipulation dataset?
dexterous manipulation dataset refers to data collected for tools, small objects, drawers, fasteners, and deformables. It usually includes egocentric video, hand pose, tactile or glove signals, metadata, and task outcomes that help train or evaluate physical AI systems.
What should a sourcing request include?
It should include task definition, environment, modality, volume, format, rights, consent, budget, deadline, and QA checks such as finger visibility, contact phases, and precise task segmentation.
What format should buyers request?
MCAP, HDF5, LeRobot, or synchronized video plus pose tracks is the recommended starting point, but truelabel can route buyer-defined schemas when the training pipeline needs a custom layout.
Can this be exclusive?
Yes. Net-new sourcing requests can request exclusive commercial rights, while off-the-shelf datasets are usually non-exclusive unless the buyer explicitly purchases exclusivity.
What should a dexterous manipulation dataset request include?
Include target task phases, environment and object coverage, sensors/cameras, action/state fields when applicable, labels, success/failure outcomes, privacy/licensing artifacts, delivery format, and pilot acceptance criteria.
Sourcing data for dexterous manipulation dataset
Specify the environment, scale, and rights you need. Truelabel matches you with capture partners delivering dexterous manipulation dataset data with consent artifacts and commercial licensing attached.
Request dexterous manipulation training data