Cited by 4Robot Manipulation and LearningSoft Robotics and ApplicationsReinforcement Learning in Robotics

Goal-Conditioned Model Simplification for 1-D and 2-D Deformable Object Manipulation

Open access
Wang, Shengyin, Leonetti, Matteo, Dogar, Mehmet·2025·IEEE Transactions on Robotics

Abstract

Motion planning for deformable object manipulation has been a challenge for a long time in robotics due to its high computational cost. In this work, we propose to mitigate this cost by limiting the number of picking points on a deformable object within the action space and simplifying the dynamics model. We do this first by identifying a minimal geometric model that closely approximates the original model at the goal state; specifically, we implement this general approach for 1-D linear deformable objects (e.g., ropes) using a piece-wise line-fitted model, and for 2-D surface deformable objects (e.g., cloth) using a mesh-simplified model. Then a small number of key particles are extracted as the pickable points in the action space which are sufficient to represent and reach the given goal. Additionally, a simplified dynamics model is constructed based on the simplified geometric model, containing much fewer particles and thus being much faster to simulate than the original dynamics model, albeit with some loss of precision. We further refine this model iteratively by adding more details from the actually achieved final state of the original model until a satisfactory trajectory is generated. Extensive simulation experiments are conducted on a set of representative tasks for ropes and cloth, which show a significant decrease in time cost while achieving similar or better trajectory costs. Finally, we establish a closed-loop system of perception, planning, and control with a real robot for cloth folding, which validates the effectiveness of our proposed method.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1109/tro.2025.3577052

Cites

63 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

7 of the 70 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wang, S., Leonetti, M., & Dogar, M.
Affiliations
  • University of Leeds (GB)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • School of Computer Science, University of Leeds, Leeds, U.K.
Venue
IEEE Transactions on Robotics
Published
2025
Volume
41
Pages
4023-4040
ISSN
  • 1552-3098 (ISSN-L)
  • 1941-0468
OpenAlex
W4411055115
Cited by
4
References
70
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1
FWCI
1.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • IEEE Transactions on Robotics (publishedVersion)
  • White Rose Research Online (University of Leeds, The University of Sheffield, University of York) (acceptedVersion)
  • Research Portal (King's College London) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Control and Systems Engineering › Robot Manipulation and Learning
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Soft Robotics and Applications
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Artificial Intelligence › Reinforcement Learning in Robotics
Keywords
deformable object manipulation, motion planning, fabric manipulation, rope manipulation, mesh simplification, cloth folding

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