pith. sign in

arxiv: 1906.08494 · v1 · pith:3EXPMTX5new · submitted 2019-06-20 · 💻 cs.RO · cs.AI

Object Placement on Cluttered Surfaces: A Nested Local Search Approach

Abdul Rahman Dabbour , Esra Erdem , Volkan Patoglu This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-25 19:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.RO cs.AI
keywords object placementcluttered surfaceslocal searchmulti-objective optimizationcollision avoidancedisplacement minimizationrobot manipulation
0
0 comments X

The pith

Nested local searches compute collision-free object placements on cluttered surfaces while minimizing displacements of existing objects.

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

The paper introduces a method to place new objects on already cluttered surfaces without collisions, while trying to move existing objects as little as possible in number and distance. In real life, the ideal final arrangement is often unknown, so the approach uses nested local searches guided by heuristics to optimize multiple goals at once. This allows efficient planning for rearrangements when only partial information is available. Experimental results indicate the method runs quickly, succeeds often, and produces high-quality placements.

Core claim

The method applies nested local searches that perform multi-objective optimizations guided by heuristics to compute a collision-free placement of objects on a cluttered surface, while minimizing the total number and amount of displacements of the existing moveable objects.

What carries the argument

Nested local searches performing multi-objective optimizations guided by heuristics to locate low-displacement collision-free placements.

If this is right

  • Placements are computed with high computational efficiency.
  • The method achieves a high success rate on evaluated scenarios.
  • The produced placements maintain good quality by keeping total displacements low.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The technique could support incremental addition of objects over time in changing scenes.
  • Pairing it with real-time perception might allow updating the clutter model before each placement decision.

Load-bearing premise

The heuristics and nested local search structure reliably locate high-quality collision-free placements that minimize displacements without getting stuck in poor local optima for typical clutter configurations.

What would settle it

A collection of cluttered surface test cases where the nested search produces placements that collide or require substantially more displacements than a known optimal arrangement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1906.08494 by Abdul Rahman Dabbour, Esra Erdem, Volkan Patoglu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: (a) A surface with an obstacle and four movable objects. (b) A random placement of new objects on the surface. (c) A collision-free placement [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Intermediate local search algorithm centroids); the heuristics is used to guide generation of new configurations. For (i), the heuristic imposes a grid on the surface S. If a grid cell has no object centroids in it, it is marked as free. If no free cell exists, a new refined grid is imposed on S with smaller but more number cells. This refinement process continues until when there is at least one free cell… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Outermost local search algorithm point, the intermediate local search algorithm calls the inner￾most search algorithm for each of these two configurations. The intermediate local search algorithm with heuristically￾guided re-placements is useful for minimizing the number of collisions on a surface, but the objects in OC may end up being displaced and rotated too much with respect to their original configur… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Plots summarize the experimental results, where each instance of each experiment was run 60 times for averaging of the results. Rows correspond [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Confined Placement Benchmark: (a) describes the problem. (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Tight Placement Scenario. (a) describes the problem, (b) presents [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Elongated Object Benchmark. (a) describes the problem, (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: 3D L-Shape Placement Benchmark. (a) describes the problem, (b) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

For planning rearrangements of objects in a clutter, it is required to know the goal configuration of the objects. However, in real life scenarios, this information is not available most of the time. We introduce a novel method that computes a collision-free placement of objects on a cluttered surface, while minimizing the total number and amount of displacements of the existing moveable objects. Our method applies nested local searches that perform multi-objective optimizations guided by heuristics. Experimental evaluations demonstrate high computational efficiency and success rate of our method, as well as good quality of solutions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper introduces a novel method for computing collision-free object placements on cluttered surfaces while minimizing the number and amount of displacements of existing movable objects. The approach relies on nested local searches that perform multi-objective optimizations guided by heuristics. The abstract claims that experimental evaluations demonstrate high computational efficiency, high success rate, and good solution quality.

Significance. If the experimental claims hold with proper validation, the work could contribute to robotic rearrangement planning in environments where goal configurations are unknown, by providing a practical heuristic-based alternative to exact methods. The nested local search structure for multi-objective optimization is a reasonable direction, but the current lack of implementation details, baselines, and metrics substantially limits the assessed significance and reproducibility.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that 'experimental evaluations demonstrate high computational efficiency and success rate' provides no details on algorithm implementation, test scenarios, baselines, or quantitative metrics. This is load-bearing for the central claim of practical utility and prevents verification that the data supports the stated performance.
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the method assumes nested local searches with (unspecified) heuristics reliably reach high-quality collision-free placements without trapping in poor local optima for typical clutter. No convergence analysis, escape mechanisms, or comparisons to exact solvers on small instances are mentioned, which is required to substantiate the claim against the risk of suboptimal basins in dense configurations.
minor comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract: the description of the nesting structure and specific heuristics could be expanded slightly to give an initial sense of the approach without requiring the full text.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comments on our manuscript. We address each major comment below and indicate where revisions will be made.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the claim that 'experimental evaluations demonstrate high computational efficiency and success rate' provides no details on algorithm implementation, test scenarios, baselines, or quantitative metrics. This is load-bearing for the central claim of practical utility and prevents verification that the data supports the stated performance.

    Authors: The abstract is intentionally concise as a summary. The full manuscript details the implementation (nested local search with specific heuristics in Section 3), test scenarios (varying object counts and clutter densities in Section 5), baselines (greedy and random methods), and metrics (runtime, success rate over repeated trials, total displacement). We will revise the abstract to briefly reference these elements and key quantitative findings for better context. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: the method assumes nested local searches with (unspecified) heuristics reliably reach high-quality collision-free placements without trapping in poor local optima for typical clutter. No convergence analysis, escape mechanisms, or comparisons to exact solvers on small instances are mentioned, which is required to substantiate the claim against the risk of suboptimal basins in dense configurations.

    Authors: The nested structure uses sequential multi-objective optimization and perturbation-based heuristics (detailed in the method) to reduce trapping in poor optima. No formal convergence analysis is provided, as the approach is heuristic; however, empirical results on small instances are reported. We will expand the discussion of escape mechanisms and add limited comparisons to exact solvers on small cases where computationally feasible. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity; heuristic method with no derivations or self-referential reductions

full rationale

The paper introduces a heuristic algorithm based on nested local searches for object placement without any equations, derivations, fitted parameters, or mathematical claims that could reduce to inputs by construction. The central contribution is presented as a novel search structure guided by heuristics, with experimental validation, but no load-bearing steps rely on self-citations, ansatzes, or renamings that create circularity. The approach remains self-contained as an empirical method rather than a derived result.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review provides no information on free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; all fields left empty.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5616 in / 974 out tokens · 19506 ms · 2026-05-25T19:55:17.617960+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 31 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Navigation among movable obstacles: Real-time reasoning in complex environments,

    M. Stilman and J. J. Kuffner, “Navigation among movable obstacles: Real-time reasoning in complex environments,” International Journal of Humanoid Robotics , vol. 2, no. 04, pp. 479–503, 2005

    work page 2005

  2. [2]

    Planning among movable obstacles with artificial constraints,

    M. Stilman and J. Kuffner, “Planning among movable obstacles with artificial constraints,”The International Journal of Robotics Research , vol. 27, no. 11-12, pp. 1295–1307, 2008

    work page 2008

  3. [3]

    Motion planning in the presence of movable obstacles,

    G. Wilfong, “Motion planning in the presence of movable obstacles,” Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence , vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 131–150, 1991

    work page 1991

  4. [4]

    Pushing blocks is hard,

    E. D. Demaine, M. L. Demaine, M. Hoffmann, and J. O’Rourke, “Pushing blocks is hard,” Computational Geometry , vol. 26, no. 1, pp. 21–36, 2003

    work page 2003

  5. [5]

    Envi- ronment manipulation planner for humanoid robots using task graph that generates action sequence,

    K. Okada, A. Haneda, H. Nakai, M. Inaba, and H. Inoue, “Envi- ronment manipulation planner for humanoid robots using task graph that generates action sequence,” in Intelligent Robots and Systems, 2004.(IROS 2004). Proceedings. 2004 IEEE/RSJ International Con- ference on, vol. 2. IEEE, 2004, pp. 1174–1179

    work page 2004

  6. [6]

    Manip- ulation planning among movable obstacles

    M. Stilman, J.-U. Schamburek, J. Kuffner, and T. Asfour, “Manip- ulation planning among movable obstacles.” Georgia Institute of Technology, 2007

    work page 2007

  7. [7]

    A planning framework for non- prehensile manipulation under clutter and uncertainty,

    M. R. Dogar and S. S. Srinivasa, “A planning framework for non- prehensile manipulation under clutter and uncertainty,” Autonomous Robots, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 217–236, 2012

    work page 2012

  8. [8]

    Manipula- tion with multiple action types,

    J. Barry, K. Hsiao, L. P. Kaelbling, and T. Lozano-P ´erez, “Manipula- tion with multiple action types,” in Experimental Robotics. Springer, 2013, pp. 531–545

    work page 2013

  9. [9]

    Push planning for object placement on cluttered table surfaces,

    A. Cosgun, T. Hermans, V . Emeli, and M. Stilman, “Push planning for object placement on cluttered table surfaces,” in Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), 2011 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on . IEEE, 2011, pp. 4627–4632

    work page 2011

  10. [10]

    Geometric rear- rangement of multiple movable objects on cluttered surfaces: A hybrid reasoning approach,

    G. Havur, G. Ozbilgin, E. Erdem, and V . Patoglu, “Geometric rear- rangement of multiple movable objects on cluttered surfaces: A hybrid reasoning approach,” in Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2014 IEEE International Conference on . IEEE, 2014, pp. 445–452

    work page 2014

  11. [11]

    Rearranging similar objects with a manipulator using pebble graphs,

    A. Krontiris, R. Shome, A. Dobson, A. Kimmel, and K. Bekris, “Rearranging similar objects with a manipulator using pebble graphs,” in Humanoid Robots (Humanoids), 2014 14th IEEE-RAS International Conference on. IEEE, 2014, pp. 1081–1087

    work page 2014

  12. [12]

    Dealing with difficult instances of object rearrangement

    A. Krontiris and K. E. Bekris, “Dealing with difficult instances of object rearrangement.” in Robotics: Science and Systems , 2015

    work page 2015

  13. [13]

    Efficiently solving general rearrangement tasks: A fast exten- sion primitive for an incremental sampling-based planner,

    ——, “Efficiently solving general rearrangement tasks: A fast exten- sion primitive for an incremental sampling-based planner,” in Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2016 IEEE International Conference on . IEEE, 2016, pp. 3924–3931

    work page 2016

  14. [14]

    High- quality tabletop rearrangement with overhand grasps: Hardness results and fast methods,

    S. D. Han, N. M. Stiffler, A. Krontiris, K. E. Bekris, and J. Yu, “High- quality tabletop rearrangement with overhand grasps: Hardness results and fast methods,” in Proceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems , 2017

    work page 2017

  15. [15]

    Automated task planning using object arrangement optimization,

    M. Kang, Y . Kwon, and S.-E. Yoon, “Automated task planning using object arrangement optimization,” in 2018 15th International Conference on Ubiquitous Robots (UR) . IEEE, 2018, pp. 334–341

    work page 2018

  16. [16]

    Make it home: automatic optimization of furniture arrangement,

    L. F. Yu, S. K. Yeung, C. K. Tang, D. Terzopoulos, T. F. Chan, and S. J. Osher, “Make it home: automatic optimization of furniture arrangement,” 2011

    work page 2011

  17. [17]

    Learning to place new objects in a scene,

    Y . Jiang, M. Lim, C. Zheng, and A. Saxena, “Learning to place new objects in a scene,” The International Journal of Robotics Research , vol. 31, no. 9, pp. 1021–1043, 2012

    work page 2012

  18. [18]

    Learning object arrangements in 3d scenes using human context,

    Y . Jiang, M. Lim, and A. Saxena, “Learning object arrangements in 3d scenes using human context,” in Proceedings of the 29th Interna- tional Coference on International Conference on Machine Learning . Omnipress, 2012, pp. 907–914

    work page 2012

  19. [19]

    Hallucinating humans for learning robotic placement of objects,

    Y . Jiang and A. Saxena, “Hallucinating humans for learning robotic placement of objects,” in Experimental Robotics. Springer, 2013, pp. 921–937

    work page 2013

  20. [20]

    The complexity of cutting complexes,

    B. Chazelle, H. Edelsbrunner, and L. J. Guibas, “The complexity of cutting complexes,” Discrete & Computational Geometry, vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 139–181, 1989

    work page 1989

  21. [21]

    A typology of cutting and packing problems,

    H. Dyckhoff, “A typology of cutting and packing problems,” European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 145 – 159, 1990

    work page 1990

  22. [22]

    Hape3d—a new con- structive algorithm for the 3d irregular packing problem,

    X. Liu, J.-m. Liu, A.-x. Cao, and Z.-l. Yao, “Hape3d—a new con- structive algorithm for the 3d irregular packing problem,” Frontiers of Information Technology & Electronic Engineering , vol. 16, no. 5, pp. 380–390, 2015

    work page 2015

  23. [23]

    Packing of concave polyhedra with continuous rotations using nonlinear optimi- sation,

    T. Romanova, J. Bennell, Y . Stoyan, and A. Pankratov, “Packing of concave polyhedra with continuous rotations using nonlinear optimi- sation,” European Journal of Operational Research , vol. 268, no. 1, pp. 37 – 53, 2018

    work page 2018

  24. [24]

    Packing irregular objects in 3d space via hybrid optimization,

    Y . Ma, Z. Chen, W. Hu, and W. Wang, “Packing irregular objects in 3d space via hybrid optimization,” Computer Graphics Forum, vol. 37, no. 5, pp. 49–59, 2018

    work page 2018

  25. [25]

    Translational packing of arbitrary polytopes,

    J. Egeblad, B. K. Nielsen, and M. Brazil, “Translational packing of arbitrary polytopes,” Computational Geometry, vol. 42, no. 4, pp. 269 – 288, 2009

    work page 2009

  26. [26]

    The three-dimensional bin packing problem,

    S. Martello, D. Pisinger, and D. Vigo, “The three-dimensional bin packing problem,” Operations Research, vol. 48, no. 2, pp. 256–267, 2000

    work page 2000

  27. [27]

    A global optimization point of view to handle non- standard object packing problems,

    G. Fasano, “A global optimization point of view to handle non- standard object packing problems,” Journal of Global Optimization , vol. 55, no. 2, pp. 279–299, 2013

    work page 2013

  28. [28]

    Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots,

    O. Khatib, “Real-time obstacle avoidance for manipulators and mobile robots,” The International Journal of Robotics Research , vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 90–98, 1986

    work page 1986

  29. [29]

    A feedback stabilized minimum dis- tance maintenance for convex parametric surfaces,

    V . Patoglu and R. B. Gillespie, “A feedback stabilized minimum dis- tance maintenance for convex parametric surfaces,” IEEE Transactions on Robotics, vol. 25, no. 5, 2005

    work page 2005

  30. [30]

    Bullet physics engine,

    E. Coumans, “Bullet physics engine,” Open Source Software: http://bulletphysics. org, vol. 1, 2010

    work page 2010

  31. [31]

    Two-dimensional packing problems using genetic algorithms,

    S. Jain and H. C. Gea, “Two-dimensional packing problems using genetic algorithms,” Engineering with Computers , vol. 14, no. 3, pp. 206–213, 1998

    work page 1998