Cited by 114Reinforcement Learning in RoboticsRobot Manipulation and LearningSoft Robotics and Applications

Dynamic Cloth Manipulation with Deep Reinforcement Learning

Open access
Jangir, Rishabh, Alenya, Guillem, Torras, Carme·2020·2020 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)

Abstract

In this paper we present a Deep Reinforcement Learning approach to solve dynamic cloth manipulation tasks. Differing from the case of rigid objects, we stress that the followed trajectory (including speed and acceleration) has a decisive influence on the final state of cloth, which can greatly vary even if the positions reached by the grasped points are the same. We explore how goal positions for non-grasped points can be attained through learning adequate trajectories for the grasped points. Our approach uses few demonstrations to improve control policy learning, and a sparse reward approach to avoid engineering complex reward functions. Since perception of textiles is challenging, we also study different state representations to assess the minimum observation space required for learning to succeed. Finally, we compare different combinations of control policy encodings, demonstrations, and sparse reward learning techniques, and show that our proposed approach can learn dynamic cloth manipulation in an efficient way, i.e., using a reduced observation space, a few demonstrations, and a sparse reward.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/icra40945.2020.9196659

Cites

38 of 38 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Cloth flattening and cloth folding can be trained jointly using a uniform goal-conditioned data-driven approach owing to their identical underlying dynamics and similar state, action, goal and policy representations.

    “Cloth flattening and cloth folding can be trained jointly using a uniform goal-conditioned data-driven approach [38,226,229] owing to their identical underlying dynamics as well as the similar state, action, goal and policy representations.”

    From Data-Driven Robotic Manipulation of Cloth-like Deformable Objects: The Present, Challenges and Future Prospects (2023) · cites this paper as [226]

    The Introduction (p. 2) and Results (p. 5) describe using a common deep-RL approach with goal states across three cloth tasks, including folding. They do not study cloth flattening or show that flattening and folding were trained jointly; the paper also does not establish that those tasks have identical underlying dynamics or similar representations. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Robust velocity control is still an unsolved challenge in this domain, although few attempt such low-level velocity control to conduct dynamic manipulation.

    “Robust velocity control is still an unsolved challenge in this domain [20,29,226], although few attempt such low-level velocity control to conduct dynamic manipulation [20,29,226,227,228].”

    From Data-Driven Robotic Manipulation of Cloth-like Deformable Objects: The Present, Challenges and Future Prospects (2023) · cites this paper as [226]

    The Introduction (p. 1) says most prior deformable-object work considered static manipulation, and State and Action (p. 4) says this study's policy specifies target manipulator velocities for dynamic cloth tasks. These passages support the claim that few approaches attempt this kind of velocity-based dynamic manipulation, but the paper does not state that robust velocity control remains unsolved. (LLM, conf=0.83)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 39 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jangir, R., Alenya, G., & Torras, C.
Affiliations
Institut de Robòtica i Informàtica Industrial (ES)
Venue
2020 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA)
Publisher
IEEE
Published
2020-05
Pages
4630-4636
ISSN
1050-4729 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2982652729
Cited by
114
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 14 · 2024: 27 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 6
FWCI
6.30
Type
conference paper
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Proceedings - IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation/Proceedings (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • UPCommons institutional repository (Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
Agencia Estatal de Investigación (MDM-2016-0656, TIN2017-90086-R)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Soft Robotics and Applications
Keywords
deep reinforcement learning, trajectory learning, sparse rewards, state representation, grasping, soft robotics

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review