Assessing the Marginal Utility of Exocentric Head Views in UMI-Style Large-FoV Wrist-Camera Manipulation

Multi-view perception is often treated as a safe design choice for robot manipulation: if one camera is useful, more cameras should be better. We revisit that assumption in tabletop bimanual manipulation by comparing policies trained with two large-field-of-view (FoV) wrist cameras against policies that additionally receive a head view, using controlled-variable experiments on a real bimanual platform. Across three tabletop tasks, adding a head view does not consistently improve task completion or execution quality: when the wrist cameras already observe the objects, grippers, and goal regions, wrist-only policies form a strong baseline. Restricting the wrist-camera FoV increases the potential value of a head view, but performance improves most reliably when the added view supplies concentrated, task-relevant information: region-of-interest (ROI) cropping yields more consistent head-view gains than the uncropped image, which is dominated by background and task-irrelevant regions. The data-scaling results further suggest an interaction between FoV and demonstration count: wide observations improve coverage but may require more data to stabilize, and they may reach a higher performance ceiling once enough demonstrations are available. These results suggest that camera design should be framed as a task-relevance and information-density problem rather than as a simple count of input views.