arXiv AI
Training-Free Action Correction for VLA Model Failures via Language Feedback
Read the original on arXiv AI →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv AI.
Related stories
arXiv AI
Jul 3
Restoring Linguistic Grounding in VLA Models via Train-Free Attention Recalibration
arXiv:2603. 06001v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models enable robots to perform manipulation tasks directly from natural language instructions and are increasingly viewed as a foundation for generalist robotic policies.
arXiv Machine Learning
Jun 11
Learning What to Say to Your VLA: Mostly Harmless Vision Language Action Model Steering
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 AI
Jun 9
Benchmarking Vision-Language-Action Models on SO-101: Failure and Recovery Analysis
arXiv:2606. 08881v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models have demonstrated strong generalization in robotic manipulation, yet existing evaluations are primarily conducted in simulation or on expensive robotic platforms, leaving their robustness on affordable real-world robots largely unexplored.
arXiv Machine Learning
Oct 12
VLA-FAIL: Efficient Task Failure Detection for Finetuned Vision-Language-Action Models
VLA-FAIL introduces a lightweight framework for detecting failures in vision-language-action models used in robotic manipulation. It combines two novel detectors: the first-layer Mahalanobis distance (LLMD) identifies out-of-distribution states by comparing token-wise deviations in last-layer features to training data, while the second, action chunk consistency (ACC), detects failures by spotting inconsistencies between consecutive action chunks in receding-horizon control. The authors also propose a threshold‑independent metric, “AUCPDT,” to evaluate detection accuracy and latency, and show through real‑world and simulation experiments that LLMD and ACC together provide reliable and early failure detection, outperforming more expensive baseline methods.
arXiv AI
Oct 1
Learning from Runtime Feedback through Failure-Bank Self-Evolution for Vision-Language-Action Models
The paper introduces FailBank, a four‑stage self‑evolving framework that transforms runtime feedback from safety shields into lasting policy improvements for vision‑language‑action (VLA) models. By using a counterfactual correction teacher, outcome‑aware admission, and guarded LoRA updates, FailBank converts useful shield proposals into corrective targets while preserving successful actions as anchors. Experiments on the VLA‑Arena benchmark show that FailBank boosts task success rates by up to 8.5 percentage points and reduces cumulative policy cost by up to 35.6%, outperforming both base policies and traditional runtime shielding.
arXiv AI
Jun 9
ReCoVLA: VLM-Guided Reward Compilation for Failure Recovery in Vision-Language-Action Policies
arXiv:2606. 09630v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Vision-language-action (VLA) policies provide strong priors for language-conditioned manipulation, but remain brittle in off-nominal states requiring targeted recovery.