arXiv:2609.13308v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: A companion evaluation found that naming the target part in a manipulation prompt increased action accuracy by 0.32-0.63 across eight vision-language...
arXiv:2609.19554v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Spatial intelligence requires more than describing object locations. Under incomplete observation, models must identify and acquire missing evidence,...
arXiv:2606. 30686v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) systems, built on pretrained vision-language models (VLMs), have shown rapidly improving performance on robot manipulation benchmarks.
arXiv:2606. 19297v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Embodied Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models are typically obtained by fine-tuning powerful pretrained VLMs on robotics data, yet it is unclear how much commonsense and factual knowledge they retain after adaptation.
Embodied Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models are typically obtained by fine-tuning powerful pretrained VLMs on robotics data, yet it is unclear how much commonsense and factual knowledge they retain after adaptation. Failures on knowledge-sensitive tasks are ambiguous, conflating missing knowledge with poor generalization of low-level control.
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.
arXiv:2606. 02735v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Generalization remains a central bottleneck for vision-language-action (VLA) models: under distractors, appearance shifts, and semantically similar tasks, the policy must often infer local execution details from coarse instructions while also deciding which parts of the image matter for control.
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:2606. 30632v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Can the robot use a plate to cut a cake if no knife is available?
arXiv:2606. 04364v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Concept bottleneck models (CBMs) predict a layer of human-named attributes before predicting a class, which makes their decisions auditable.
The paper introduces a new benchmark for vision‑language models that tests their ability to decide whether to answer a physics question immediately or to request additional experimental evidence. Each problem presents one measurement image and four possible physical worlds defined by two masses and two values of another property; the model must either stop and answer or choose the cheapest experiment that resolves the question. Across six open models and 144 parameter sets, the models almost always repeat the same action even when the optimal choice changes, and only a single model gets both decisions correct on 5.9% of cases.
arXiv:2607. 03595v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Affordance grounding aims to localize image regions that support a specific action, serving as a core capability for physical intelligence and embodied perception.