MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7105987019 · doi:10.1109/lra.2025.3634905

Hybrid Contact Dynamics and Residual-RL Framework for Multi-Point Object Pushing

2025· article· W7105987019 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueIEEE Robotics and Automation Letters · 2025
Typearticle
Language
FieldEngineering
TopicRobot Manipulation and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Research Council CanadaNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaCanadian Space Agency
KeywordsTrajectoryObject (grammar)GrippersController (irrigation)Control theory (sociology)RobotPoint (geometry)Contact dynamicsContact force

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Robotic contact manipulation involves applying controlled forces at contact points to guide an object along a desired trajectory while respecting the underlying physical interactions. This paper presents a novel framework that integrates dynamic modeling and Reinforcement Learning (RL) to achieve robust object pushing with a redundant robotic arm. First, a comprehensive dynamic contact model is formulated, incorporating unilateral constraints and a box friction model to capture the nonlinearities present in real-world contact dynamics. Second, the model is extended to handle multiple simultaneous point contacts, enabling effective trajectory planning and tracking for a redundant robotic arm in multi-contact pushing tasks. Third, an RL strategy is introduced as a residual module that augments a model-based controller to improve pushing performance. Simulation and real-world experiments with a Kinova Gen2 arm demonstrate that the proposed method achieves accurate trajectory following and stable contact interactions, significantly outperforming traditional PD control strategies in dynamic pushing scenarios.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.850
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.250 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIEEE Robotics and Automation LettersSame topicRobot Manipulation and LearningFrench-language works237,207