The paper audits frozen decoder‑only large language models (LLMs) on geometric reasoning tasks using parametric CAD constraints. It probes hidden states for linear decodability, forced‑choice generation, activation‑level influence, and behavioral steerability, finding that pretraining improves decoding of local geometric relations but not sketch‑level DOF status. The study shows that decodable information is not always actionable: generation often fails to express it, and steering interventions do not reliably control outputs, revealing divergences among decodability, generation, activation influence, and steerability.
By Man Liang, Xinzhao Cheng, Faizan Wajid
The paper introduces BAS‑VLA, a task‑semantic action calibration framework for vision‑language‑action models that addresses two failure modes: unnecessary action drift under appearance changes and insufficient behavioral change under semantic alterations. BAS‑VLA uses a breaking‑centered calibration core and a selective evidence‑gated preserving auxiliary to maintain performance on clean and semantics‑preserving conditions while suppressing stale‑task behavior. Experiments on OpenPI‑pi0.5 and LIBERO‑Object Milk‑Swap show high success rates on clean and preserved tasks, a dramatic drop under target‑object swaps, and improved robustness to style shifts from 42% to 70% without harming clean performance.
By Shuaijun Liu, Feiyang You, Chengyu Wu, Shuyang Hao, Chenglong Zhang, Jingyao Cai, Xingwei Chen, Ningxin Su
The study examines how different vision‑language‑action (VLA) policies execute a manipulation task by comparing the geometry of their end‑effectors across 15,000 closed‑loop LIBERO rollouts. By pairing 3,600 configuration‑matched policy executions, the authors find that when both policies succeed, their end‑effector trajectories are much closer (median DTW distance 0.0120 m) than when only one succeeds (0.0380 m), a pattern consistent across all tasks, policy pairs, and nine representations. Even successful executions remain as far from same‑task demonstrations as the demonstrations are from each other, indicating that task‑associated geometry, rather than training data overlap, drives these differences.
By Xingyu Lin, Zhuang Li, Zhongrun Wu, Shouquan Zhou, Dehui Du
arXiv:2609.39971v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Vision-language-action (VLA) models can exceed 90% success on in-distribution tasks and withstand nuisance changes that preserve the required action,...
By Hung-Jen Chen, Yu-Hsun Hou, Yan-Hong Chen, Yan-Fu Chen, Binghua Cai, Min Sun, Chun-Yi Lee
The paper introduces Interaction‑Aligned Pruning (IAprune), a training‑free method for visual token pruning in embodied manipulation tasks. IAprune jointly decides per‑frame budget and token selection, using semantic‑motion spatial agreement to choose between conservative and aggressive coverage, and applies geometric residual correction to focus on under‑represented boundaries. Experiments on four policies, three simulation benchmarks, and a real‑robot platform show that IAprune matches unpruned performance on LIBERO while achieving up to 1.54× speed‑up and 1.48× acceleration on a real robot.
By Jintao Cheng, Weibin Li, Haozhe Wang, Gang Wang, Yipu Zhang, Xiaoyu Tang, Jin Wu, Xieyuanli Chen, Yunhui Liu, Wei Zhang
The paper investigates how large language models (LLMs) share a common Fisher‑Rao geometry in their next‑token probability distributions, revealing that behaviour largely determines this geometry while activation geometry depends on coordinate choices. Across transformer, state‑space, and recurrent architectures, output geometries align more closely than activation geometries, and this shared structure facilitates semantic‑category transfer and improves agreement with human word choices as models scale and train. The study further demonstrates that geometry can guide minimum‑disturbance interventions, enabling reusable control that preserves behaviour better than Euclidean methods and enhances steering, editing, attribution, dictionary learning, and fine‑tuning.
By Dario Picozzi
ActionPiece rethinks how actions are tokenized for autoregressive vision‑language‑action models by introducing physical rank consistency (PRC) to evaluate relational fidelity of reconstructed actions. The method jointly supervises representation learning and quantization to preserve local physical distance rankings, improving both PRC and policy success. Experiments on LIBERO, LIBERO‑Plus, SimplerEnv, and VLA‑Arena show significant gains over baseline tokenizers.
By Shijie Lian, Bin Yu, Zhaolong Shen, Xiaopeng Lin, Yichao Du, Zhirui Zhang, Laurence T. Yang, Kai Chen
arXiv:2608.29537v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Frozen vision-language-action (VLA) policies offer broad manipulation skills but execute open-loop action chunks without tracking task progress, so t...
By Hongbo Gao, Zeyu Ni, Xin Wen, Siyu Xu, Ruifeng Li
The paper investigates how small action errors evolve when using action chunking in behavioural cloning. By injecting errors at each state and observing their growth under open‑loop (no replanning) and closed‑loop (replanning) regimes, the authors classify states as contracting, expanding, or unresolved. Across twelve manipulation tasks, they find that stable states are rare, error amplification is common, and that short‑horizon fitting can overestimate long‑horizon propagation. Predictors trained on camera and proprioceptive data can recover open‑loop stability but only partially capture closed‑loop dynamics, indicating that standard imitation learning does not reliably produce policies that contract errors when perturbed.
By Aryan Goyal
arXiv:2606. 30113v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Discrete action tokenization provides a compact interface for autoregressive VLA policies, but accurately recovering continuous robot actions from discrete codes remains challenging.
By Tengyue Jiang, Chunpu Xu, Jiayue Kang, Yao Mu
LM‑X is a generalist vision‑language‑action policy that augments action prediction with three online, explicitly supervised signals: return‑to‑go (RTG) for task progress, event‑to‑go (ETG) for the next semantic transition, and heteroscedastic action flow for local reliability. By conditioning action generation on these signals, LM‑X embeds explainability directly into control rather than as a post‑hoc explanation. After a 20‑day pretraining run on 64 GPUs, LM‑X outperforms an action‑only backbone by 16.0 points and a single‑head variant by 10.8 points, and achieves 74.1 % success on 50 RoboTwin2.0 tasks and 68.6 % on seven real‑robot tasks, surpassing the GR00T N1.7 baseline.
By Jin Lou, Jingxuan Zhu, Andong Chen, Xupeng Wang, Yuan Xu, Yuexuan Li, Xingdong Zhu, Zhijie Zhu, Yingwei Ji, Wenpeng Nie, Jingyi Li, Liangliang Chen, Jinyan Liu, Zhiqi Song, Jidong Zhang, Hongming Li, Yuchen Zhu
The paper investigates how different action tokenization methods affect closed‑loop control in autoregressive vision‑language‑action models. It compares analytical, linear, and nonlinear representations, showing that lower reconstruction error does not guarantee better policy performance. The study highlights the need to evaluate tokenization on multiple criteria, including sequence predictability and decoder stability, rather than relying solely on reconstruction fidelity.
By Yuxin Yang, Gaohan He, Changxue Guan, Hangming Liu