arXiv:2607. 02092v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Flow-matching vision-language-action policies generate robot action chunks through an iterative transport process, creating an opportunity for test-time guidance without retraining the base policy.
arXiv:2606. 31846v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models offer a promising framework for robotic manipulation by connecting language instructions, visual observations, and continuous control.
arXiv:2609.21216v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language-action (VLA) policies based on flow matching generate action chunks through repeated evaluations of an action expert. Increasing the...
DriftOPD is a teacher‑free, rollout‑free framework that performs sequence‑level on‑policy distillation of continuous Vision‑Language‑Action (VLA) action experts. It decomposes the sequence‑level reverse‑KL divergence into a chunk‑level reverse‑KL term and a future‑potential term, optimizing them with a one‑step drifting objective and a Q‑function critic learned from offline demonstrations. Experiments on multiple VLA architectures in simulation and real‑world manipulation show that DriftOPD outperforms existing one‑step distillation baselines while matching the task success of multi‑step teacher policies.
The paper introduces QWM, a framework that integrates world models with standard Q‑learning to perform test‑time search over imagined trajectories. By training the policy and value function solely on real transitions, QWM avoids compounding model bias while still benefiting from predictive search. Experiments on the Robomimic and LIBERO manipulation benchmarks show that QWM outperforms strong prior state‑of‑the‑art methods in both sample efficiency and performance.
arXiv:2607.04171v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: How can richer training supervision improve robot control while keeping the deployed policy compact? We present XS-VLA, a staged training fra...
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:2510. 05681v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision-Language-Action models (VLAs) have demonstrated remarkable performance in robot control.
arXiv:2605. 27284v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models are increasingly expected to not only complete robot tasks, but also follow human instructions about how those tasks should be executed.
arXiv:2606. 12299v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models provide a natural language interface to robot control, but the mapping from language to behavior is often brittle and unintuitive: semantically similar instructions can induce drastically different behaviors, while some capabilities may not be elicitable through prompting alone.
arXiv:2607. 02222v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-Language Navigation has increasingly emphasized high-level instruction reasoning, memory, global map construction, and instruction decomposition, while the low-level action representation remains comparatively underexplored.
arXiv:2605. 30280v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Embodied intelligence is often studied through specialized models for individual tasks such as manipulation or navigation, resulting in fragmented capabilities and limited generalization across tasks, environments, and robot embodiments.
arXiv:2607. 01586v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language-action models (VLAs) have recently advanced robotic manipulation, yet the effects of different robot-data pre-training paradigms remain difficult to compare because existing models often differ in architecture, data, action space, and evaluation protocol.