Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

UBSoft: A Simulation Platform for Robotic Skill Learning in Unbounded Soft Environments

T0 review · 5 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read UBSoft simulates unbounded soft environments for robot learning by keeping fine material resolution near the robot and coarse resolution everywhere else, cutting storage and compute by over an order of magnitude while preserving dynamics…

desk verdict A useful engineering contribution with a plausible adaptive MPM scheme, but the core resampling details and one-scene validation need to be documented before I'd trust it for long-horizon tasks. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.12711 v1 pith:PE42LMYG submitted 2024-11-19 cs.RO

Chunru Lin , Jugang Fan , Yian Wang , Zeyuan Yang , Zhehuan Chen , Lixing Fang , Tsun-Hsuan Wang , Zhou Xian
show 1 more author
Chuang Gan
This is my paper · ORCID
classification cs.RO
keywords soft-bodysimulationmaterialpointmethodspatiallyadaptiveresolutionrobotskilllearningtrajectoryoptimizationsim-to-realtransfergranularmaterialsunboundedenvironments
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper argues that robot skill learning in soft environments does not have to be confined to small sandboxes. It introduces a simulation platform in which a Material Point Method grid is nested around the robot, with fine cells and small particles near the agent and coarser cells and larger particles farther away; as the robot moves, the hierarchy moves and particles are split or merged to match. The paper claims this spatially adaptive scheme cuts storage and computation by more than an order of magnitude on large soft scenes, and in a falling-cube accuracy test produces dynamics closer to a 256-resolution reference (Chamfer distance 5.32, a point-cloud similarity measure) than a uniform 128-resolution simulation does (12.97) while running in less time. It also reports a benchmark of eight manipulation and locomotion tasks in sand and snow, where sampling-based trajectory optimization generally outperforms reinforcement learning and differentiable-physics gradients, and shows that trajectories optimized in simulation transfer open-loop to a real robot arm for sand painting and scooping.

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is a moving hierarchical grid paired with a particle split-and-merge rule. Nested cubic grids with side lengths doubling from a base cell size $l_0$ are centered on the active robot; finer grids and smaller particles are used near the robot, coarser grids and larger particles farther out. During each step, particles that cross into a finer layer are split into smaller particles with momentum conserved, and particles in a coarse layer are merged by centroid position and averaged state, so the average particle count per cell stays roughly constant. This hierarchy carries the argument because it lets the platform spend compute and memory only where the agent currently is, while still retaining a coarse record of the rest of the environment and of past interactions.

What would settle it

Run a robot walking in a straight line through a large sand scene for many steps while tracking total particle mass and the particle field near the robot; if particles systematically vanish or accumulate as they cross the outer boundary of the moving hierarchy, or if the near-field state diverges from a full-domain high-resolution MLS-MPM reference as the scene grows, the unbounded claim is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that an unbounded soft environment can be simulated efficiently by concentrating resolution where it matters. The authors build the platform on the Moving Least Squares Material Point Method, with Lagrangian particles carrying position, velocity, deformation gradient, and volume, and Eulerian grids handling interaction. Their spatially adaptive scheme places nested grids of side length $l_i=2^i l_0$ around the robot, so the finest grid sits at the agent and coarser grids extend outward. Particles in coarse regions are represented by larger particles; when the moving hierarchy overtakes them they are split into smaller particles with momentum conserved, and when small particles accumulate in a coarse cell they are merged into larger ones with averaged state. The paper reports that this reduces storage and time by over an order of magnitude relative to uniform MLS-MPM as scene scale grows, while remaining closer to the fine-resolution reference than a uniform medium-resolution run. The same engine is fully differentiable, supports rigid-body coupling, and the paper demonstrates that one optimized trajectory for sand painting and one for scooping transfer directly to a real robot arm.

Load-bearing premise

The claim stands or falls on whether coarse particles far from the robot faithfully represent slowly moving material, and on what happens when particles cross the outermost moving grid; the paper tests the former with only one falling-cube run and never specifies the latter.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Soft-material scenes that would require billions of particles can be simulated faster than real time on current laptop GPUs, opening long-horizon training for locomotion across sand dunes or snowfields.
  • Memory use stops scaling with total scene volume and instead scales with the resolution layers around the agent, so expanding the simulated world adds mostly coarse particles.
  • For obtaining a single successful trajectory, sampling-based trajectory optimization (CMA-ES) is the stronger default choice across most of the benchmark tasks.
  • Differentiable physics gradients remain useful, but mainly for contact-rich, subtly shaped tasks such as sand painting; long-horizon backpropagation through clipping degrades them elsewhere.
  • Open-loop trajectories optimized in simulation can execute on a real robotic arm for sand writing and scooping, which is evidence of a small sim-to-real gap.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same agent-centered resolution idea could carry to particle-based fluids, debris, or coupled rigid-soft scenes where remote material still flows slowly toward the robot; the paper does not test those settings.
  • The paper argues against freezing distant particles, but does not directly compare against a freeze heuristic; a head-to-head would isolate how much accuracy comes from letting far material evolve slowly at coarse resolution.
  • Because observations are formed by stratified sampling from hierarchical layers with a fixed total particle budget, the platform could in principle be extended to arbitrarily large scenes with no growth in observation dimension; the paper does not claim this explicitly.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper introduces UBSoft, a simulation platform for robot skill learning in large-scale soft-body environments. The core contribution is a spatially adaptive MLS-MPM engine that uses hierarchical grids centered on the robot agent, with finer grids and smaller particles near the agent and coarser representations farther away. The platform is claimed to reduce storage and computation by over an order of magnitude while preserving simulation fidelity. The paper also presents eight benchmark tasks (four manipulation, four locomotion), evaluates PPO, SAC, CMA-ES, and differentiable-physics trajectory optimization, and reports open-loop sim-to-real transfer for two manipulation tasks on an XArm.

Significance. If the spatially adaptive resampling mechanism is sound, UBSoft addresses a genuine bottleneck: existing MPM-based simulators are limited to small, bounded domains, whereas robot locomotion and manipulation in sand or snow require large scenes. The benchmark suite and fully differentiable implementation are potentially useful to the robot-learning community. However, the central resampling scheme is under-specified, the accuracy claims rest on a single scene and a single scalar metric, and the treatment of the "unbounded" boundary is not described. The paper's value depends on details that are currently deferred to code and appendix text, so the contribution is promising but not yet established.

major comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 3.2 and Appendix A] The split/merge resampling is the load-bearing component of the adaptive scheme, but it is described only verbally: 'other maintained information on the particles is averaged according to specific rules' with no equations. For elastoplastic materials modeled with multiplicative F = Fe Fp (sand, snow, elastic), averaging the deformation gradient or other state without specifying how Fe/Fp and plastic history are transformed can erase plastic strain or inject spurious stress. Please provide explicit update rules for position, velocity, mass/volume, F, and plasticity state during split and merge, and validate the resampling on a scene that exercises repeated split/merge cycles (e.g., a robot walking a long distance), rather than the single falling-cube test in Sec. 5.1.
  2. [Sec. 5.1, Table 1 and Fig. 4] The efficiency-accuracy claim rests on one falling-cube scene, a single end-of-simulation Chamfer distance computed against an MLS-MPM 256 approximation that is not ground truth. There is no error trajectory over time, no repeated trials, no statistical uncertainty, and no comparison of contact forces or agent-relevant quantities such as foot penetration. The claim that the adaptive result 'closely matches' MLS-MPM 256 is therefore not established beyond a single sample. Additionally, the dotted-line speedup/storage curves in Fig. 4 are extrapolated ('transitional MPM fails to simulate'), so the order-of-magnitude benefit for large scenes is asserted rather than measured.
  3. [Sec. 3.2 and App. A] The manuscript never specifies what happens to particles that leave the outermost hierarchical grid as the robot moves, nor how particles behind the agent are handled when the grid is re-centered. The paper's central claim of supporting 'unbounded' environments depends directly on this mechanism. For long-horizon locomotion, the robot traverses large distances and the moving grid boundary will inevitably intersect the soft material; without an explicit algorithm for particle transfer, outflow, or reinsertion, the unboundedness claim is unsupported. Please add a precise description of the grid-motion and boundary treatment.
  4. [Sec. 3.2 and reproducibility] The paper repeatedly refers to 'the code' ('Readers are recommended to refer to the code and Appendix A') but provides no code repository URL, supplementary material, or pseudocode. For a platform paper whose central contribution is the adaptive implementation, the missing resampling equations and hierarchical-grid stencil details mean the work cannot be independently reproduced or assessed. Make the code/implementation available or include the necessary details in the paper.
  5. [Sec. 5.3 and Appendix C.2] The sim-to-real transfer section is qualitative only: the text states that the robot writes 'CoRL' and scoops a cube, with no quantitative success rates, comparisons against a non-transferred baseline, or multiple trials. The conclusion that UBSoft has a 'small sim-to-real gap' is not supported by the reported evidence. Please add quantitative evaluation (e.g., success rate, trajectory tracking error, or sand-painting Chamfer distance in the real scene) or temper the claim accordingly.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Throughout] The platform name is rendered inconsistently as 'UBS OFT' in the abstract, introduction, and conclusion; it should be 'UBSoft' everywhere.
  2. [Sec. 3.2] The hierarchical-grid description defines li = 2^i l0 and says the grid count per dimension is '2 * k', but k is never defined in terms of layer count L or the grid extents. Define k and L explicitly.
  3. [Sec. 4.2] There is a typo in 'unbounded sandy pr snowy landscape'; 'pr' should be 'or'.
  4. [Appendix B.1] The line 'We sample NS = PL l=1 Nl = 200 particles' is unclear about whether Nl is a per-layer count or whether the sum is over layers; specify how many particles are sampled per layer and how the total of 200 is obtained.
  5. [Table 3] Some reward values appear suspiciously duplicated with different standard deviations (e.g., Quadruped Snow Walk PPO mean 2387.4 in Table 2 vs Quadruped Elastic Walk PPO mean 2387.4 in Table 3). Verify that these are not copy-paste errors.
  6. [Sec. 5.2] The comparison across methods is based on raw rewards that have different scales per task; reporting normalized success rates or per-task completion criteria would make the conclusions more robust.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the adaptive-simulation claims are engineering comparisons, not derivations from their own outputs.

full rationale

This paper makes no claim that a derived quantity is logically equivalent to a fitted input. The central efficiency and accuracy claims in Table 1 compare UBSoft's spatially adaptive MLS-MPM against uniform-resolution MLS-MPM simulations of the same falling-cube scene. The adaptive engine is the same physics solver with a resampling scheme, so the comparison is a self-consistency test rather than an independent benchmark; however, that is a limitation in validation strength, not circular reasoning, because the Chamfer-distance result is not an input to the simulation or to the comparison. The split/merge resampling in Sec. 3.2 is admittedly underspecified and validated only through one end-state shape metric, but this is a correctness and robustness gap, not a circular step. The sim-to-real section calibrates material parameters (Young's modulus, Poisson's ratio, density, friction angle) to match the real sand and then optimizes a trajectory in simulation; this is standard system identification and open-loop transfer, not a fitted prediction disguised as a result. No uniqueness theorem from the authors is imported to force a choice, no ansatz is smuggled in through self-citation, and no known result is merely renamed. The self-citations that appear are to prior differentiable-simulation works and are not load-bearing for the present platform's design or evaluation. The paper is therefore best characterized as an engineering contribution whose main claims rest on its own comparative experiments, with some validation limitations, but without circularity. Score 1 reflects the absence of circular reasoning while acknowledging that the 'realism' comparison uses the same underlying solver family rather than an external ground truth.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The platform's efficiency claims rest on the adaptive resolution design. Most free parameters are design choices (layers, particle thresholds) and material constants tuned for sim-to-real; the key unvalidated assumptions are the fidelity of the coarse far-field and the unbounded-domain handling.

free parameters (3)
  • grid layer count L = 4 (manipulation), 8 (locomotion)
    Chosen by the authors; affects the extent of the high-resolution region and the storage/speed trade-off.
  • particle split/merge thresholds = not specified
    The conditions for splitting and merging particles are not given numerical values, making the scheme under-specified.
  • material parameters (E, nu, rho, alpha) = E=1e6, nu=0.2, rho=1000.0, alpha=45
    Tuned in Sec 5.3 to match the real sand for sim-to-real transfer; these are not derived from first principles.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption MLS-MPM accurately models the soft materials used
    The platform builds on MLS-MPM [9] and assumes its physical fidelity; no independent validation of the constitutive models is provided.
  • ad hoc to paper Coarse far-field particles can be merged without affecting agent-relevant dynamics
    The core efficiency claim rests on this; it is tested only indirectly via Chamfer distance on a single scene (Table 1).
  • ad hoc to paper The moving hierarchical grid can represent an unbounded environment without boundary artifacts
    The paper claims 'unbounded' environments but does not specify how particles are handled at or beyond the outermost grid layer.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of UBSoft: A Simulation Platform for Robotic Skill Learning in Unbounded Soft Environments." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PE42LMYG

@misc{pith2026241112711,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: UBSoft: A Simulation Platform for Robotic Skill Learning in Unbounded Soft Environments},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PE42LMYG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.12711}
}
read the original abstract

It is desired to equip robots with the capability of interacting with various soft materials as they are ubiquitous in the real world. While physics simulations are one of the predominant methods for data collection and robot training, simulating soft materials presents considerable challenges. Specifically, it is significantly more costly than simulating rigid objects in terms of simulation speed and storage requirements. These limitations typically restrict the scope of studies on soft materials to small and bounded areas, thereby hindering the learning of skills in broader spaces. To address this issue, we introduce UBSoft, a new simulation platform designed to support unbounded soft environments for robot skill acquisition. Our platform utilizes spatially adaptive resolution scales, where simulation resolution dynamically adjusts based on proximity to active robotic agents. Our framework markedly reduces the demand for extensive storage space and computation costs required for large-scale scenarios involving soft materials. We also establish a set of benchmark tasks in our platform, including both locomotion and manipulation tasks, and conduct experiments to evaluate the efficacy of various reinforcement learning algorithms and trajectory optimization techniques, both gradient-based and sampling-based. Preliminary results indicate that sampling-based trajectory optimization generally achieves better results for obtaining one trajectory to solve the task. Additionally, we conduct experiments in real-world environments to demonstrate that advancements made in our UBSoft simulator could translate to improved robot interactions with large-scale soft material. More videos can be found at https://vis-www.cs.umass.edu/ubsoft/.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.12711 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The title of the paper is written on a large scene covered with soft material by a robotic [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. MPM Simulation with Spatially Adaptive Scheme. Hierarchical grids are centered around the robot agent and become sparser further out. As the robot moves, these grids move in sync, and the particles are resampled to match the grid cell sizes by splitting large particles in small grids and merging small particles in large grids. Subsequent phases of P2G and G2P adhere to standard MPM protocols but are adapted to accom… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. 4 manipulation tasks and 4 locomotion tasks proposed in UBS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: With larger scenes, the spatially adaptive scheme significantly reduces the storage space [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Reward curves for all methods including PPO, SAC, CMA-ES, and Differentiable Physics. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Hierarchical Grids for Spatially Adaptive Scheme. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: A robot dog walks in a desert with dunes. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Reward curves for all methods on locomotion tasks, including PPO, SAC, and CMA-ES. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Sand painting and scooping task rollouts in the real world using an XArm. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. RobotSmith: Generative Robotic Tool Design for Acquisition of Complex Manipulation Skills

    cs.RO 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    RobotSmith autonomously designs, 3D-prints, and uses task-specific tools for robotic manipulation, raising task success from 2.8% (no tool) to 50% in simulation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 34 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Y . Wang, Z. Xian, F. Chen, T.-H. Wang, Y . Wang, K. Fragkiadaki, Z. Erickson, D. Held, and C. Gan. Robogen: Towards unleashing infinite data for automated robot learning via generative simulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.01455, 2023

    arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    Y . Wang, J. Zheng, Z. Chen, Z. Xian, G. Zhang, C. Liu, and C. Gan. Thin-shell object manipulations with differentiable physics simulations. In The Twelfth International Conference on Learning Representations, 2023

    work page 2023

  3. [3]

    Huang, Y

    Z. Huang, Y . Hu, T. Du, S. Zhou, H. Su, J. B. Tenenbaum, and C. Gan. Plasticinelab: A soft- body manipulation benchmark with differentiable physics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2104.03311, 2021

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    Z. Xian, B. Zhu, Z. Xu, H.-Y . Tung, A. Torralba, K. Fragkiadaki, and C. Gan. Fluidlab: A differentiable environment for benchmarking complex fluid manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.02346, 2023

    arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    K. Zhu, X. He, S. Li, H. Wang, and G. Wang. Shallow sand equations: Real-time height field simulation of dry granular flows. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics , 27(3):2073–2084, 2019

    work page 2019

  6. [6]

    Zhu and X

    B. Zhu and X. Yang. Animating sand as a surface flow. In Eurographics (short papers), pages 9–12, 2010

    work page 2010

  7. [7]

    Ihmsen, A

    M. Ihmsen, A. Wahl, and M. Teschner. High-resolution simulation of granular material with sph. In VRIPHYS, pages 53–60, 2012

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    Y . Yue, B. Smith, P. Y . Chen, M. Chantharayukhonthorn, K. Kamrin, and E. Grinspun. Hybrid grains: Adaptive coupling of discrete and continuum simulations of granular media. ACM Trans. Graph., 37(6):283:1–283:19, Nov. 2018

    work page 2018

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    Y . Hu, Y . Fang, Z. Ge, Z. Qu, Y . Zhu, A. Pradhana, and C. Jiang. A moving least squares material point method with displacement discontinuity and two-way rigid body coupling. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 37(4):1–14, 2018

    2018

  2. [10]

    Z. Xu, Z. Xian, X. Lin, C. Chi, Z. Huang, C. Gan, and S. Song. Roboninja: Learning an adaptive cutting policy for multi-material objects. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.11553, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  3. [11]

    J. Han, W. Huang, H. Ma, J. Li, J. Tenenbaum, and C. Gan. Learning phys- ical dynamics with subequivariant graph neural networks. In S. Koyejo, S. Mo- hamed, A. Agarwal, D. Belgrave, K. Cho, and A. Oh, editors, Advances in Neu- ral Information Processing Systems , volume 35, p...

    2022

  4. [12]

    Y . Li, J. Wu, R. Tedrake, J. B. Tenenbaum, and A. Torralba. Learning particle dynamics for manipulating rigid bodies, deformable objects, and fluids. arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.01566, 2018

    2018 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Pfaff, M

    T. Pfaff, M. Fortunato, A. Sanchez-Gonzalez, and P. W. Battaglia. Learning mesh-based simulation with graph networks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.03409, 2020

    2010 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Schenck and D

    C. Schenck and D. Fox. Spnets: Differentiable fluid dynamics for deep neural networks. In Conference on Robot Learning, pages 317–335. PMLR, 2018

    2018

  7. [15]

    Ummenhofer, L

    B. Ummenhofer, L. Prantl, N. Thuerey, and V . Koltun. Lagrangian fluid simulation with continuous convolutions. In International Conference on Learning Representations , 2019. 9

    2019

  8. [16]

    Z. Xian, S. Lal, H.-Y . Tung, E. A. Platanios, and K. Fragkiadaki. Hyperdynamics: Meta-learning object and agent dynamics with hypernetworks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2103.09439, 2021

    2021 arXiv

  9. [17]

    J. Han, W. Huang, H. Ma, J. Li, J. B. Tenenbaum, and C. Gan. Learning physical dynamics with subequivariant graph neural networks. In Thirty-Sixth Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems, 2022

    2022

  10. [18]

    Sanchez-Gonzalez, J

    A. Sanchez-Gonzalez, J. Godwin, T. Pfaff, R. Ying, J. Leskovec, and P. Battaglia. Learning to simulate complex physics with graph networks. In International conference on machine learning, pages 8459–8468. PMLR, 2020

    2020

  11. [19]

    Y . Hu, L. Anderson, T.-M. Li, Q. Sun, N. Carr, J. Ragan-Kelley, and F. Durand. Difftaichi: Differentiable programming for physical simulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1910.00935, 2019

    1910 arXiv

  12. [20]

    de Avila Belbute-Peres, K

    F. de Avila Belbute-Peres, K. Smith, K. Allen, J. Tenenbaum, and J. Z. Kolter. End-to-end differentiable physics for learning and control. Advances in neural information processing systems, 31, 2018

    2018

  13. [21]

    Y .-L. Qiao, J. Liang, V . Koltun, and M. C. Lin. Scalable differentiable physics for learning and control. arXiv preprint arXiv:2007.02168, 2020

    2007 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Y .-L. Qiao, J. Liang, V . Koltun, and M. C. Lin. Differentiable simulation of soft multi-body systems. In Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems (NeurIPS) , 2021

    2021

  15. [23]

    S. Chen, Y . Xu, C. Yu, L. Li, X. Ma, Z. Xu, and D. Hsu. Daxbench: Benchmarking de- formable object manipulation with differentiable physics. In The Eleventh International Con- ference on Learning Representations , 2023. URL https://openreview.net/forum?id= 1NAzMofMnWl

    2023

  16. [24]

    S. Li, Z. Huang, T. Chen, T. Du, H. Su, J. B. Tenenbaum, and C. Gan. Dexdeform: Dexterous deformable object manipulation with human demonstrations and differentiable physics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.03223, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    X. Zhu, J. Ke, Z. Xu, Z. Sun, B. Bai, J. Lv, Q. Liu, Y . Zeng, Q. Ye, C. Lu, et al. Diff-lfd: Contact-aware model-based learning from visual demonstration for robotic manipulation via differentiable physics-based simulation and rendering. In Conference on Robot Learning, pages...

    2023

  18. [26]

    M. Macklin. Warp: A high-performance python framework for gpu simulation and graphics. In NVIDIA GPU Technology Conference (GTC), 2022

    2022

  19. [27]

    T. Du, K. Wu, P. Ma, S. Wah, A. Spielberg, D. Rus, and W. Matusik. Diffpd: Differentiable projective dynamics. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 41(2):1–21, 2021

    2021

  20. [28]

    Y . Li, T. Du, K. Wu, J. Xu, and W. Matusik. Diffcloth: Differentiable cloth simulation with dry frictional contact. ACM Trans. Graph., 42(1), oct 2022. ISSN 0730-0301. doi:10.1145/3527660. URL https://doi.org/10.1145/3527660

    2022 doi

  21. [29]

    J. Xu, T. Chen, L. Zlokapa, M. Foshey, W. Matusik, S. Sueda, and P. Agrawal. An end-to-end differentiable framework for contact-aware robot design. arXiv preprint arXiv:2107.07501 , 2021

    2021 arXiv

  22. [30]

    X. Lin, Z. Huang, Y . Li, J. B. Tenenbaum, D. Held, and C. Gan. Diffskill: Skill abstraction from differentiable physics for deformable object manipulations with tools. arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.17275, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  23. [31]

    S. Li, Z. Huang, T. Du, H. Su, J. B. Tenenbaum, and C. Gan. Contact points discovery for soft-body manipulations with differentiable physics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.02835, 2022. 10

    2022 arXiv

  24. [32]

    T.-H. Wang, P. Ma, A. E. Spielberg, Z. Xian, H. Zhang, J. B. Tenenbaum, D. Rus, and C. Gan. Softzoo: A soft robot co-design benchmark for locomotion in diverse environments. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.09555, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Huang, F

    Z. Huang, F. Chen, Y . Pu, C. Lin, H. Su, and C. Gan. Diffvl: Scaling up soft body manipulation using vision-language driven differentiable physics. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36, 2024

    2024

  26. [34]

    C. Chi, B. Burchfiel, E. Cousineau, S. Feng, and S. Song. Iterative residual policy for goal- conditioned dynamic manipulation of deformable objects. In Proceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems (RSS), 2022

    2022

  27. [35]

    C. Zhao, C. Jiang, J. Cai, M. Y . Wang, H. Yu, and Q. Chen. Flipbot: Learning continuous paper flipping via coarse-to-fine exteroceptive-proprioceptive exploration. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pages 10282–10288. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  28. [36]

    Ha and S

    H. Ha and S. Song. Flingbot: The unreasonable effectiveness of dynamic manipulation for cloth unfolding. In Conference on Robotic Learning (CoRL) , 2021

    2021

  29. [37]

    Z. Xu, C. Chi, B. Burchfiel, E. Cousineau, S. Feng, and S. Song. Dextairity: Deformable manipulation can be a breeze. In Proceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems (RSS) , 2022

    2022

  30. [38]

    R. Wu, C. Ning, and H. Dong. Learning foresightful dense visual affordance for deformable object manipulation. In IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV) , 2023

    2023

  31. [39]

    Sudry, T

    M. Sudry, T. Jurgenson, A. Tamar, and E. Karpas. Hierarchical planning for rope manipulation using knot theory and a learned inverse model. In Conference on Robot Learning , pages 1596–1609. PMLR, 2023

    2023

  32. [40]

    Sunil, S

    N. Sunil, S. Wang, Y . She, E. Adelson, and A. R. Garcia. Visuotactile affordances for cloth manipulation with local control. In Conference on Robot Learning, pages 1596–1606. PMLR, 2023

    2023

  33. [41]

    H. Shi, H. Xu, S. Clarke, Y . Li, and J. Wu. Robocook: Long-horizon elasto-plastic object manipulation with diverse tools. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.14447, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    X. Lin, C. Qi, Y . Zhang, Z. Huang, K. Fragkiadaki, Y . Li, C. Gan, and D. Held. Planning with spatial-temporal abstraction from point clouds for deformable object manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.15751, 2022

    2022 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Oller, M

    M. Oller, M. P. i Lisbona, D. Berenson, and N. Fazeli. Manipulation via membranes: High- resolution and highly deformable tactile sensing and control. In Conference on Robot Learning, pages 1850–1859. PMLR, 2023

    2023

  36. [44]

    Millard, D

    D. Millard, D. Pastor, J. Bowkett, P. Backes, and G. S. Sukhatme. Granular gym: High perfor- mance simulation for robotic tasks with granular materials. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.01369, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  37. [45]

    A. P. Thompson, H. M. Aktulga, R. Berger, D. S. Bolintineanu, W. M. Brown, P. S. Crozier, P. J. In’t Veld, A. Kohlmeyer, S. G. Moore, T. D. Nguyen, et al. Lammps-a flexible simulation tool for particle-based materials modeling at the atomic, meso, and continuum scales. Compute...

    2022

  38. [46]

    M. Sieb, Z. Xian, A. Huang, O. Kroemer, and K. Fragkiadaki. Graph-structured visual imitation. In Conference on Robot Learning, pages 979–989. PMLR, 2020

    2020

  39. [47]

    Seita, Y

    D. Seita, Y . Wang, S. J. Shetty, E. Y . Li, Z. Erickson, and D. Held. Toolflownet: Robotic manipulation with tools via predicting tool flow from point clouds. In Conference on Robot Learning, pages 1038–1049. PMLR, 2023. 11

    2023

  40. [48]

    Y . Li, S. Li, V . Sitzmann, P. Agrawal, and A. Torralba. 3d neural scene representations for visuomotor control. In Conference on Robot Learning, pages 112–123. PMLR, 2022

    2022

  41. [49]

    Alvarado, C

    E. Alvarado, C. Paliard, D. Rohmer, and M.-P. Cani. Real-time locomotion on soft grounds with dynamic footprints. Frontiers in Virtual Reality, 3:801856, 2022

    2022

  42. [50]

    Y . Hu, Y . Fang, Z. Ge, Z. Qu, Y . Zhu, A. Pradhana, and C. Jiang. A moving least squares material point method with displacement discontinuity and two-way rigid body coupling. ACM Trans. Graph., 37(4), jul 2018. ISSN 0730-0301. doi:10.1145/3197517.3201293

    2018

  43. [51]

    Townsend

    J. Townsend. Differentiating the singular value decomposition. Technical report, Technical Report 2016, https://j-towns. github. io/papers/svd-derivative . . . , 2016

    2016

  44. [52]

    Zheng, Z

    S. Zheng, Z. Zhou, X. Chen, D. Yan, C. Zhang, Y . Geng, Y . Gu, and K. Xu. Luisarender: A high- performance rendering framework with layered and unified interfaces on stream architectures. ACM Trans. Graph., 41(6), nov 2022. ISSN 0730-0301. doi:10.1145/3550454.3555463. URL htt...

    2022

  45. [53]

    G. Klár, T. Gast, A. Pradhana, C. Fu, C. Schroeder, C. Jiang, and J. Teran. Drucker-prager elastoplasticity for sand animation. ACM Trans. Graph., 35(4), jul 2016. ISSN 0730-0301. doi:10.1145/2897824.2925906. URL https://doi.org/10.1145/2897824.2925906

    2016

  46. [54]

    Stomakhin, C

    A. Stomakhin, C. Schroeder, L. Chai, J. Teran, and A. Selle. A material point method for snow simulation. ACM Transactions on Graphics (TOG), 32(4):1–10, 2013

    2013

  47. [55]

    Hansen and A

    N. Hansen and A. Ostermeier. Completely derandomized self-adaptation in evolution strategies. Evolutionary computation, 9(2):159–195, 2001

    2001

  48. [56]

    Haarnoja, A

    T. Haarnoja, A. Zhou, P. Abbeel, and S. Levine. Soft actor-critic: Off-policy maximum entropy deep reinforcement learning with a stochastic actor. In International conference on machine learning, pages 1861–1870. PMLR, 2018

    2018

  49. [57]

    Schulman, F

    J. Schulman, F. Wolski, P. Dhariwal, A. Radford, and O. Klimov. Proximal policy optimization algorithms. arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347, 2017

    2017 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Raffin, A

    A. Raffin, A. Hill, A. Gleave, A. Kanervisto, M. Ernestus, and N. Dormann. Stable-baselines3: Reliable reinforcement learning implementations. The Journal of Machine Learning Research , 22(1):12348–12355, 2021

    2021

  51. [59]

    Hansen, Y

    N. Hansen, Y . Akimoto, and P. Baudis. Cma-es/pycma on github. zenodo, doi: 10.5281/zenodo. 2559634.(feb. 2019), 2019. 12 A Implementation Details on the UBS OFTEngine Figure 6: Hierarchical Grids for Spatially Adaptive Scheme. Figure 7: A robot dog walks in a desert with dune...

    2019 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.