GOAG: Generative and Object-Agnostic Grasp Planner for Dexterous Robotic Manipulation
A robot hand learns to grasp new objects by only studying its own fingers, never the objects
Robot hands that grip objects with multiple fingers usually need training on object-specific datasets, which makes them struggle with unfamiliar objects. GOAG instead trains only on the gripper's own surface geometry and joint kinematics, never seeing any object during training, and only looks at object shape at inference time. On the MultiDex benchmark it reaches an average success rate of 86.93%, matching top methods trained specifically on that dataset while being much faster when generating many grasps.
What they did
- Existing deep-learning grasp planners are trained on limited, object-specific datasets and often fail to generalize to new objects
- GOAG generates its training data purely from the gripper's own surface and joint configurations, so the training phase never involves any object geometry
- Using six grasp types adapted from a human grasp taxonomy, the team sampled contact regions on the gripper to build a 3-million-sample dataset in about 1 GPU hour, versus 1,400 GPU hours reported by a prior method
- At inference, a Conditional Variational Autoencoder (CVAE) takes the new object's shape and predicts plausible contact points on it, which then pass through a force-closure check and an optimization step to produce the final hand pose
- GOAG achieved 86.93% average success rate on MultiDex, matching leading dataset-specific methods, ranked second-highest average success rate across five different grasp benchmarks using only a single Shadow Hand model without retraining, and successfully grasped 11 real YCB objects with a physical robot arm

| Grasp Representation | Grasp | Representation | Gripper Pose | Gripper | Pose | Gripper Joint Values | Gripper | Joint Values | Force Closure | Force | Closure | Non- Penetration | Non- | Penetration | Training Set | Training | Set | Working Reference Frame | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Grasp | |||||||||||||||||||
| Representation | |||||||||||||||||||
| Gripper | |||||||||||||||||||
| Pose | |||||||||||||||||||
| Gripper | |||||||||||||||||||
| Joint Values | |||||||||||||||||||
| Force | |||||||||||||||||||
| Closure | |||||||||||||||||||
| Non- | |||||||||||||||||||
| Penetration | |||||||||||||||||||
| Training | |||||||||||||||||||
| Set | |||||||||||||||||||
| Working | |||||||||||||||||||
| Reference Frame | |||||||||||||||||||
| Optional Grasp | |||||||||||||||||||
| Preference Interface | |||||||||||||||||||
| DFC [14] | Direct | Optimized | Optimized | ✓ | ✓ | No | Object | ✗ | |||||||||||
| UniGrasp [24] | Intermediate | IK Solved | IK Solved | ✓ | ✗ | Objects + Grippers | Object | ✗ | |||||||||||
| GeoMatch [2] | Intermediate | IK Solved | IK Solved | ✓ | ✗ | Objects + Grippers | Object | ✗ | |||||||||||
| GenDexGrasp [12] | Intermediate | Optimized | Optimized | ✓ | ✓ | Objects + Grippers | Object | ✗ | |||||||||||
| ManiFM [37] | Intermediate | Optimized | Optimized | ✓ | ✓ | Objects + Grippers | Object | Contact Region | |||||||||||
| DRO-Grasp [32] | Intermediate | Optimized | Optimized | ✓ | ✓ | Objects + Grippers | Object | Palm Orientation | |||||||||||
| DexDiffuser [33] | Direct | Learned | Learned | A posteriori | A posteriori | Objects + Grippers | Object | ✗ | |||||||||||
| DexGrasp Anything [39] | Direct | Learned | Learned | ✓ | ✓ | Objects + Grippers | Object | ✗ | |||||||||||
| GOAG (Ours) | Intermediate | Sampled | Optimized | ✓ | ✓ | Gripper Only | Gripper | Palm Full Pose |
![Fig. 2: Grasp Taxonomy Adaptation and Contact Sampling. (Top) We adapt the human grasp taxonomy from [7] to the Allegro Hand geometry. For each grasp type (e.g., C6, F27), we define a corresponding admissible contact region (black points), distinguishing it from the non-contact surface (blue points). (Bottom) Data generation mechanism: We randomly sample specific contact points (red) strictly within the admissible black regions. This allows the model to learn structured, feasible contact distributions based solely on gripper kinematics, independent of any object.](https://media.metallab.ai/papers/2608.19759/f1.png)
| Method | Data Driven | Object-Agnostic Training | Success Rate (%) ↑ | Efficiency (sec. / grasps) ↓ | Diversity (avg.) ↑ | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Barrett | Allegro | ShadowHand | Avg. | Barrett | Allegro | ShadowHand | T (m) | R (rad) | Q (rad) | |||
| DFC [14] | ✗ | ✓ | 83.10 | 82.71 | 72.15 | 79.32 | >1800 | >1800 | >1800 | 0.0607 | 1.424 | 0.3579 |
| GenDexGrasp [12] (full) | ✓ | ✗ | 70.26 | 71.48 | 71.15 | 70.96 | 9.78 | 16.45 | 14.65 | 0.0519 | 1.416 | 0.2567 |
| DRO-Grasp [32] (pretrain, w/o controller) | ✓ | ✗ | 78.30 | 75.80 | 63.30 | 72.47 | 0.88 | 0.42 | 1.72 | 0.0546 | 1.515 | 0.2892 |
| GOAG (w/o FC) | ✓ | ✓ | 86.30 | 91.20 | 74.70 | 84.07 | 0.09 | 0.13 | 0.15 | 0.0480 | 1.396 | 0.3162 |
| GOAG | ✓ | ✓ | 87.40 | 93.20 | 77.90 | 86.93 | 0.18 | 0.19 | 0.20 | 0.0479 | 1.401 | 0.3170 |
![Fig. 3: Overview of GOAG. Geometrical graspability is learned in an object-agnostic manner by focusing on the gripper’s capabilities. Training: We sample gripper configurations Q to generate ℋ(Q) and corresponding contact points (𝒞(ℋ(Q))). To ensure transferability, we use a Basis Point Set (BPS) encoding tied to the gripper’s workspace. A Conditional Variational Autoencoder (CVAE) is trained to reconstruct these contact distributions, while a Links Mapper (PointNet++) learns to associate contact points with specific gripper links. Inference: A novel object 𝒪, positioned at the inverse gripper pose [R,T]−1, is BPS-encoded. By sampling a latent variable z∈ℝψ, the CVAE Decoder generatively predicts diverse, plausible contact points 𝒞^(𝒪). The Links Mapper then labels which gripper link should reach each point. Generation: Finally, a Force Closure check ensures the predicted contacts yield a stable grasp, and a Grasp Optimization step outputs the final, refined gripper configuration Q∗.](https://media.metallab.ai/papers/2608.19759/f2.png)
| Method | Per-Dataset Training | DexGraspNet ↑ | UniDexGrasp ↑ | MultiDex ↑ | RealDex ↑ | DexGRAB ↑ | Avg. (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UniDexGrasp [35] | ✓ | 33.9 | 23.7 | 21.6 | 27.1 | 20.8 | 25.42 |
| GraspTTA [10] | ✓ | 18.6 | 21.0 | 30.3 | 13.3 | 14.4 | 19.52 |
| SceneDiffuser [9] | ✓ | 26.6 | 28.3 | 69.8 | 21.7 | 39.1 | 37.10 |
| UGG [16] | ✓ | 46.9 | 46.0 | 55.3 | 32.7 | 42.7 | 44.72 |
| DGA [39] | ✓ | 57.5 | 53.1 | 79.1 | 44.8 | 57.9 | 58.48 |
| GOAG | ✗ | 43.07 | 49.51 | 77.90 | 37.37 | 62.13 | 53.97 |
![Fig. 4: GOAG grasp results on Multidex [12] objects. Grasps are shown for the Barrett (green), Allegro (pink), and Shadow Hand (purple) grippers.](https://media.metallab.ai/papers/2608.19759/f3.png)
Why it matters
Robots in warehouses or homes encounter an enormous variety of objects, and retraining a grasp model for every new object is costly and impractical. By training only once on the gripper itself, GOAG offers a more practical path to robots that can grip unfamiliar objects without needing new object data or retraining.
![Fig. 5: Real-world setup and results with Allegro hand on YCB [5] objects. First row presents the real robot grasps. Second row presents corresponding virtual grasps. Objects have been rotated around the z-axis for a better understanding of the grasp poses.](https://media.metallab.ai/papers/2608.19759/f4.jpg)
Terms in this paper
- Gripper · the robotic hand mechanism used to grasp objects
- CVAE (Conditional Variational Autoencoder) · a generative deep learning model that produces varied outputs conditioned on given input information
- BPS (Basis Point Set) · a method that encodes a 3D point cloud into a fixed-size numerical representation
- Force Closure · a physical condition checking whether a set of contact points can hold an object stably without slipping
- PointNet++ · a deep learning network architecture designed to process 3D point cloud data
Original abstract (English)
Multifingered grasping is a crucial robotic skill, but current deep-learning grasp planners often struggle to generalize to new objects because they are trained on limited, object-specific datasets. We introduce a fundamentally different approach, grounded in the observation that the gripper and the object share identical surface geometry at their mutual contact points. We propose GOAG: Generative and Object-Agnostic Grasp Planner for Dexterous Robotic Manipulation, a novel deep generative model that learns a compact latent representation of a specific gripper's contact surface distribution, enabling the efficient sampling of valid grasp configurations without relying on object-specific training data. We show that by introducing object features only at inference time, our model can effectively retrieve admissible contact areas that are compatible with the gripper's capabilities. We validate our approach through extensive experiments on established grasp protocols in both simulated and real-world scenarios, demonstrating its effectiveness with different grippers from the literature. Our method delivers state-of-the-art results on the objects from the MultiDex dataset, achieving an average success rate of 86.93%. It offers significantly faster processing when generating numerous grasps, while matching the performance of leading approaches specifically trained on this dataset. Unlike these methods, our approach does not rely on object-specific training data, highlighting the advantages of object-agnostic learning. It effectively addresses the generalization challenges faced by traditional data-driven grasp planners. Code and videos are available on our project website https://cea-list.github.io/goagweb/ .
Read on arXivLatest papers
- Frequency-Aware Continual Learning for Smart Contract Vulnerability Detection with Large Language ModelsA smart-contract vulnerability detector that keeps learning new bug types without forgetting old ones, then folds everything into one model
- Asymmetric Attention Heads: Structured Head-Wise Context Allocation for Transformer AttentionTesting whether every attention head in a Transformer really needs to see the same amount of context
- Are LLMs becoming similarly creative? Evidence from three years of modelsNewer AI chatbots are giving increasingly similar answers to each other, three years of data show
- Specification-delta-driven data governance: an empirical study of the {\guillemotleft}spec-delta{\guillemotright} as the unit of change in lakehouse data platformsTreating data-platform changes like reviewable spec snippets instead of code diffs: an experiment design paper
- Remember, Verify, or Ask? Cross-Family Evaluation of Memory Commitment in LLM AgentsAI assistants would rather double-check facts than ask you a question, even when asking is the right call
- A knowledge-guided agentic framework for mitigating patient-context ambiguity in health queriesGetting AI to ask the right follow-up questions before answering vague health queries
- Robust Incomplete Multimodal Sentiment Analysis via Iterative Proxy CorrectionWhen text input is missing or broken, this AI doesn't guess once and move on—it revises its guess step by step to read emotions more reliably
- FlashPrefill V2: Block-Sparse Prefill Attention for Long-Context LLM ServingMaking sparse attention fast enough and accurate enough for real LLM serving, not just papers
Latest from METAL LAB
Figures: Julien Merand et al., arXiv:2608.19759, CC BY 4.0