arXiv:2604. 21241v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision--Language--Action (VLA) models often use intermediate representations to connect multimodal inputs with continuous control, yet spatial guidance is often injected implicitly through latent features.
Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2607. 08182v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language-action (VLA) models aim to map multimodal inputs to robot actions.
Vision-language-action (VLA) models aim to map multimodal inputs to robot actions. However, most existing approaches struggle to cover complex dynamic scenarios due to treating all visual tokens uniformly and reasoning with human-selected factors, which lack mechanisms to emphasize task-critical evidence and ignore underlying factors.
arXiv:2607. 04171v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large Vision-Language Models (LVLMs) have shown strong multimodal understanding and spatial grounding, but their computational cost limits real-time robotic control.
arXiv:2605. 09948v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Current Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models typically treat the deepest representation of a vision-language backbone as universally optimal for action prediction.
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:2607. 27138v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language-action (VLA) models remain constrained by scarce action-labeled robot data, whereas action-free videos offer abundant observations of physical change.