arXiv:2606. 00253v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Fine-tuning Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models for mobile manipulators with heterogeneous joint spaces can produce a counterintuitive result: the checkpoint with the lowest aggregate MSE is not the one that performs best on the real robot.
arXiv:2608.21407v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language-action (VLA) models face a crucial tradeoff between their task success rate and the policy-call frequency. Executing a single action...
arXiv:2606. 29898v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Real-world evaluation is the gold standard for robot policies because it tests them against the physical conditions and deployment challenges they are ultimately designed to handle.
arXiv:2607. 16821v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Task arithmetic, sequential fine-tuning, activation steering, and first-order random search all operate through relatively small perturbations around an already trained checkpoint, and they rely on different local approximations: individual perturbations should be first-order predictable, task updates should compose with controlled interference, useful tangent structure should be stable and possible to estimate, and weight edits should have counterparts in representation space.
arXiv:2608. 16889v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Long-horizon robot manipulation chains many contact-rich skills into one multi-stage task.
arXiv:2607. 09776v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: When adapting Vision Language Action (VLA) models to downstream tasks, multiple rounds of post-training are often required to progressively address policy weaknesses.
arXiv:2607. 17136v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Agentic computer-use RL is reported in single runs, and those numbers mislead.
Long-horizon robot manipulation chains many contact-rich skills into one multi-stage task. Vision-language-action (VLA) models increasingly master the individual skills, yet the chain still fails: err...
arXiv:2607. 28405v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: World Action Models (WAMs) jointly predict future observations and actions, but their iterative denoising and closed-loop execution make efficient deployment costly.
arXiv:2606. 27755v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models enable instruction-driven robotic manipulation, but they inherit oversized language backbones from pretrained VLMs whose capacity far exceeds what is needed for short robotic instructions.
VLCP (Vision Language Control Policy) is a training‑free robot manipulation approach that keeps a vision‑language model (VLM) frozen and uses it to generate short Python control functions. Unlike traditional methods that retry a fixed policy, VLCP rewrites the control code every K steps based on multi‑view RGB, proprioceptive state, and state delta, allowing failures to be corrected within the same episode. In a 57‑task MuJoCo/RoboVerse benchmark, VLCP achieves 35.1% pooled success versus 3.5% for a single‑query baseline, with a 27.3% within‑episode recovery rate on failed grasps and efficient token usage.
arXiv:2608. 11739v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The prevailing recipe for Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models couples a pretrained VLM with a separately trained flow-matching action expert.
arXiv:2607. 25487v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models translate natural-language commands into robot action sequences, but leading systems on the LIBERO-Plus robustness benchmark use three- to seven-billion-parameter backbones whose memory demands can exceed embedded robotic budgets.