arXiv:2606. 04046v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: In embodied vision-language decision making tasks such as robotic manipulation and navigation, Vision-Language and Vision-Language-Action Models (VLMs & VLAs) are powerful tools with different benefits: VLMs are better at long-term planning, while VLAs are better at reactive control.
arXiv:2608. 04765v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language-action (VLA) models provide a unified paradigm for connecting visual perception, language understanding, and robotic control.
arXiv:2601. 03309v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models, which integrate pretrained large Vision-Language Models (VLM) into their policy backbone, are gaining significant attention for their promising generalization capabilities.
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:2606. 17924v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Current Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models face a trade-off between efficient action generation and explicit deliberation.
arXiv:2607. 10383v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Visual Language Navigation foundation models aim to unify deep reasoning for grounded spatial decisions with broad versatility for diverse embodied tasks.
LoopVLA introduces a recurrent Vision‑Language‑Action architecture that learns to refine multimodal representations, predict actions, and estimate when further refinement is unnecessary. By iteratively applying a shared Transformer block and producing a sufficiency score at each step, it decouples refinement from fixed layer indices and aligns confidence scores with action quality through a self‑supervised objective. Experiments on LIBERO, LIBERO‑Plus, and VLA‑Arena demonstrate that LoopVLA reduces model parameters by 45% and boosts inference throughput up to 1.7× while matching or surpassing strong baselines in task success.
arXiv:2505.13180v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Integrating Large Language Models with symbolic planners is a promising direction for obtaining verifiable and grounded plans, with recent works ex...
arXiv:2606. 12550v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Open-world mapless navigation from sparse language instructions requires resolving underspecified goals and inferring which environmental cues are relevant for reaching the goal.
RoboSPA is a large-scale robotic manipulation dataset and benchmark designed to evaluate Vision‑Language‑Action models on fine‑grained spatial reasoning and long‑horizon procedural planning. It contains 10 task categories, 56 base tasks, and 280 variants across five difficulty levels, with 527K trajectories collected from multiple embodiments and scenes. The benchmark introduces diagnostic metrics beyond binary success, revealing that current VLA models struggle with complex spatial relations, precise execution, and memory‑intensive planning.
arXiv:2512. 20014v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: While Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models generalize well to generic instructions, they struggle with personalized commands such as "bring my cup," where the robot must act on one specific instance among visually similar objects.
The paper introduces Vision‑RL2, a region‑level reinforcement learning approach that optimizes a lightweight proposal network for fine‑grained multimodal large language model (MLLM) perception. By treating coherent image regions as actions and scoring them with a frozen MLLM reader, the method selectively focuses visual resolution on evidence, reducing token usage while improving accuracy across multiple benchmarks and backbones. The approach eliminates the need for region annotations, response sampling, or reasoning trajectories, and the refined proposals enable sparse encoding that magnifies relevant evidence.
arXiv:2511. 15669v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Does Chain-of-Thought (CoT) reasoning genuinely improve Vision Language Action (VLA) models, or does it merely add overhead?