A grip that stays in place.
A frozen comparison of four hold controllers on eight new simulated scenes. Holding the object and keeping the tool in place are measured together.
32 scheduled attempts. Every failure stays in the denominator. Authored controls using simulator state; no model training or hardware qualification.
Five-second outcomes
The primary endpoint requires continuous grip plus TCP motion within 4 mm and 0.05 rad. “Active stationary grip” additionally requires the controller to remain qualified. A post-refusal fallback can retain an object; that does not establish successful active regulation.
Every attempt
measured joint · all eight attempts
issued joint · all eight attempts
cartesian · all eight attempts
incremental · all eight attempts
What changed
The new incremental candidate accumulates the current pose-error step around the target issued before admission. It retains the jaw request, limits each correction update to 0.002 rad and refuses a proposed total above 0.03 rad. Candidate measurements outside the native joint margin are refused before solving. The three previous controllers remain unchanged.
These are nearby deterministic development cells, not independent random trials or a real-world reliability estimate. The study does not test transport, placement, videos, cameras or cross-arm transfer. Timing in the JSON is shared-host offline computation, not sensor latency.