Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 49 references

OWMM-Agent: Open World Mobile Manipulation With Multi-modal Agentic Data Synthesis

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read A single vision-language model, fine-tuned on simulator-generated data, can drive a mobile robot through open-ended 'move object to receptacle' instructions, outperforming general-purpose VLM pipelines and transferring to a real robot.

desk verdict A solid simulation-grounded extension of VLM fine-tuning for mobile manipulation, but the real-world zero-shot claim is thinner than the abstract suggests. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.04217 v2 pith:HHIJDAOY submitted 2025-06-04 cs.RO cs.AI

Junting Chen , Haotian Liang , Lingxiao Du , Weiyun Wang , Mengkang Hu , Yao Mu , Wenhai Wang , Jifeng Dai
show 3 more authors
Ping Luo Wenqi Shao Lin Shao
This is my paper
classification cs.ROcs.AI
keywords open-worldmobilemanipulationvision-languagemodelinstructiontuningagenticdatasynthesisaffordancegroundingembodiedagentzero-shottransfer
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper tries to establish that open-world mobile manipulation can be treated as a multi-turn, multi-image vision-language reasoning problem, with one instruction-tuned VLM serving as the whole decision-making core. It introduces OWMM-Agent, which gives the model a long-term environment memory of pre-mapped photographs, a transient textual record of robot state, and four high-level action types (search scene frame, navigate to point, pick, place), and it contributes a simulator-based agentic data-synthesis pipeline that produces 235k instruction-tuning examples without manual annotation. On 308 simulated episodes the fine-tuned 38B model reaches 21.9% strict full-task success, versus 0.33% for pipelines built on a general-purpose VLM, with zero dead loops; on ten real-world samples with a mobile manipulator it achieves 90% action-generation correctness despite being trained only on simulated data. The reason a sympathetic reader would care is that this is a concrete demonstration that global scene understanding for robots does not require dense 3D reconstruction, and that open-ended 'move this to that' instructions can be carried by a single model plus standard planners.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is OWMM-VLM, a vision-language model fine-tuned from a pre-trained open-source VLM with the vision encoder frozen and the projector and language model trained on a synthetic instruction dataset. Its inputs are a natural-language instruction, a set of posed RGB frames from a pre-mapping phase, the robot's current egocentric RGB and depth, and a rolling textual 'Robot History'; its outputs are chain-of-thought reasoning plus one of four JSON high-level actions. The data-synthesis pipeline is the other essential mechanism: planning-language-derived task sequences executed in a physics simulator, key-step selection, a filtering step that keeps only frames where objects or receptacles are visible and reachable, template-based reasoning and summarization, and language-model paraphrasing, yielding 235k annotations across 21,046 episodes. Together these convert the open-world manipulation problem into a supervised multi-image QA task that a single model can learn.

What would settle it

Remove from the pose-graph images all frames that show the target object or the goal receptacle and run the same 308 simulated episodes; if any episode still succeeds, the paper's stated reliance on pre-mapping is not the actual mechanism. A second check is to repeat the 10-case real-world evaluation after moving the furniture and objects, and see whether the 90% action accuracy persists when the stored photos no longer match the live scene.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that a single VLM, fine-tuned on synthetic agentic data, can serve as the complete decision-making core of a mobile manipulation agent: it receives the task instruction, a pose graph of pre-recorded RGB frames, the current egocentric view, and a textual history, and outputs both a chain-of-thought and a high-level action in JSON (search scene frame, navigate to point, pick, or place) with a bounding box whose center is the grasp or placement target. The key move is to defer geometric precision: the agent does not build a dense semantic map; it uses global photographs to decide where to go, then relies on planners and the robot's local depth once it arrives. The paper argues the pre-trained model's visual-grounding prior makes bounding-box affordance prediction reliable, while instruction tuning on the synthetic episodes supplies the three missing abilities: rare grounding (navigable areas, not just objects), state tracking through summarized history, and embodiment priors such as reach distance. The paper supports the claim with single-step capability scores, 308 simulated episodes, ablations on data scale and output format, and a 10-case real-robot evaluation.

Load-bearing premise

The whole system depends on a pre-mapping pass in which every object and goal receptacle is captured in the set of posed photographs; if something is missing from those images, or the scene changes afterward, the model cannot retrieve it and the episode cannot succeed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A robot can carry out long-horizon 'put this object on that receptacle' instructions using only a set of pre-recorded photographs plus local depth, without any dense 3D semantic map.
  • Instruction tuning with synthetic, action-annotated episodes raises a VLM's egocentric decision-making from 17.5% to 96.7% (8B) and gives a large model 21.9% strict full-task success with zero dead loops in simulation.
  • The same pipeline scales: data size drives most of the gain, while object and scene diversity has only a small effect once volume is held fixed.
  • Generating bounding-box affordances rather than points, and keeping chain-of-thought reasoning and history summarization in the output, are each necessary for the reported accuracy.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the mapping assumption can be relaxed, the same architecture is a candidate general 'memory plus tools' controller for other long-horizon embodied tasks, since the VLM only outputs high-level actions and the planners stay external. (Editorial inference.)
  • The data-synthesis pipeline could be reused to produce instruction-tuning data for different robot morphologies or for tasks beyond pick-and-place, but the paper's own cross-embodiment limitation suggests the learned reach priors would have to be retrained per robot.
  • A straightforward testable extension is to vary the density of the pose graph (number of stored frames per room) and measure how image retrieval and full-task success change, which the paper does not report.
  • The real-world evaluation was limited to ten human-confirmed samples in a static lab scene; a stress test with furniture moved after mapping would clarify how much of the 90% accuracy comes from the stored photographs.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes OWMM-Agent, a unified VLM-based architecture for open-world mobile manipulation. The system receives natural-language instructions, a pre-mapped pose graph with associated RGB images, and egocentric observations; it outputs high-level actions (image retrieval, navigation, pick, place) in JSON form that are executed by classical planners. To adapt a base VLM (InternVL-2.5) to this task, the authors introduce a simulation-based agentic data synthesis pipeline that generates instruction-finetuning data from PDDL task sequences in Habitat, and they train 8B and 38B variants. Experiments in simulation report large margins over GPT-4o-based baselines on single-step capabilities and episodic task success, with no dead loops in 308 episodes. A real-world study on a Fetch robot reports 90% action-generation accuracy on 10 samples selected from one SLAM run, judged by human operators with human confirmation before execution.

Significance. The paper makes a plausible and potentially useful contribution in the form of a data-synthesis pipeline for embodied VLM finetuning and a unified agent architecture that avoids explicit 3D semantic mapping. The simulation evaluation is comparatively thorough: it uses held-out scenes and objects, includes ablations of data scale, diversity, output format, and reasoning, and reports a dead-loop metric that directly addresses a common failure mode of LLM-based agents. The 0/308 dead-loop result and the large margins over GPT-4o+PIVOT and GPT-4o+RoboPoint are concrete strengths. However, the paper's headline claim of 'strong zero-shot generalization in real world' is not yet supported at the same standard: the real-world evaluation is small, human-judged, and does not measure physical task completion. The pre-mapping assumption, acknowledged in Appendix B, is also load-bearing and is not stress-tested, so the open-world claim should be read as conditional on complete and static scene coverage.

major comments (3)
  1. [5.3, Table 4, Abstract] The real-world evaluation does not support the abstract's claim of 'strong zero-shot generalization in real world' at the level of task performance. Only 10 samples are selected from a single human-controlled SLAM run, and 'Total Acc' is an aggregate of image retrieval (7/10), object/receptacle affordance (10/10), and navigation affordance (10/10), not a measure of episode completion. Moreover, the robot does not physically execute actions autonomously: the agent waits for human confirmation and human operators judge correctness. This is a useful pilot study, but the generalization claim should be either substantially tempered or supported by a larger, more diverse, physically executed evaluation.
  2. [3.1, Appendix B, Appendix D.1] The pre-mapping assumption is load-bearing for the episodic evaluation and for the open-world claim. Section 3.1 defines the input as a pose graph G and images I that exist before the task begins, and Appendix B concedes that the method assumes a pre-mapping phase. If a task-relevant object or goal receptacle was not captured during mapping, or the scene changed afterward, image retrieval cannot localize it and the episode cannot succeed regardless of model capability. The simulation evaluation in Appendix D.1 constructs the pose graph with known object positions, so the effect of incomplete or stale maps is never measured. The paper should either quantify map coverage in real scenes or explicitly scope the claims to episodes where all task-relevant objects are visible in the pre-mapped images.
  3. [5.2, Table 3] The episodic results reveal a large gap between perception and manipulation that should be discussed when claiming state-of-the-art performance. In the strict setting, image retrieval for the object reaches 88.56% and 'robot close to object' 84.64%, but 'object picked' drops to 38.56%, and full task success is 21.90%. The margin over GPT-4o-based baselines is large, but those baselines essentially fail (0.33%), so the comparison mainly shows that the finetuned model is usable rather than that the overall task is solved. The paper should add an analysis of the manipulation bottleneck and report failure modes (e.g., grasp failures, place misalignment) rather than only aggregate success rates.
minor comments (4)
  1. [3.2, Eq. (2)] The notation is inconsistent: the equation uses Ht on both the left and right but the text refers to Ht and Ht−1. Please unify the history variable definitions.
  2. [Related Works and Appendix D.1] There are several typographical errors, including 'freqeuncy', 'The Univeristy', 'quesion', 'by itelf', and 'fetches' for 'Fetch'. These should be corrected.
  3. [Table 4] The real-world table reports only fractions (e.g., 7/10, 10/10) without confidence intervals or per-sample details. Given the very small sample size, even a brief qualitative description of the three failure cases would help the reader assess the result.
  4. [5.1, Table 2] The single-step evaluation would benefit from a precise definition of how the 'Total' task score is computed from the sub-metrics, because the paper currently reports percentages for decision-making and image retrieval but 0–1 scores for affordance grounding. The aggregation rule is not stated.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the model is fine-tuned on synthetic data and evaluated on disjoint splits, with metrics defined independently of the training labels.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. OWMM-VLM is fine-tuned on a synthetic dataset generated from PDDL task sequences and ground-truth simulator state (Sec. 4.1), then evaluated on held-out scenes and objects (Appendix D.1 uses a 113:30 scene split and 137:20 object split, giving 152k training entries and 4k test entries). The evaluation metrics in Sec. 5.1 and 5.2 measure action-category correctness, retrieved-frame correctness, and pixel affordance distance against an independent ground-truth labeling; none is defined as a function of the training labels, and no post-hoc fitting to the test set is reported. Comparisons against GPT-4o, PIVOT, RoboPoint, and InternVL-2.5 use a unified input/output configuration (Appendix E), so the SOTA claim is not forced by construction. The acknowledged pre-mapping reliance (Appendix B) is a shared assumption of the OVMM setting, not a circular derivation. The only citation overlapping with the author list is the use of InternVL-2.5 and its backbones as the base model for fine-tuning (Appendix C); this is model initialization and does not carry the argument's load. The training/test prompt-format match is standard practice and does not constrain the outcome.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on standard ML assumptions (fine-tuning transfers, held-out evaluation is representative) plus three domain-specific assumptions about pre-mapping, action executable format, and sim-to-real image similarity. The only hand-chosen numerical inputs affecting the headline success rates are the episodic distance thresholds, which are derived from the test-set receptacle sizes.

free parameters (1)
  • episodic success distance thresholds = 0.85m (strict) and 1.7m (lenient)
    Chosen as half and full average diagonal of goal receptacle 3D bounding boxes in the test set (Appendix F). The reported full-task success rates, 21.9% and 51.5%, depend directly on these manual thresholds.
assumptions (3)
  • domain assumption Pre-mapping provides a complete posed RGB pose graph covering all task-relevant objects and receptacles.
    Section 3.1 defines inputs G and I; if the pose graph lacks an object, image retrieval fails and the episode cannot proceed.
  • domain assumption The VLM's JSON-structured output (bounding boxes and action types) can be reliably converted into executable planner commands.
    Section 3.2 assumes high-level actions map to planners; any parse error or out-of-range coordinate would break execution.
  • domain assumption Synthetic Habitat images and real head-camera images are sufficiently close in distribution for zero-shot transfer after fine-tuning.
    Section 5.3 claims zero-shot generalization from sim-only training; only 10 real samples support this claim.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of OWMM-Agent: Open World Mobile Manipulation With Multi-modal Agentic Data Synthesis." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HHIJDAOY

@misc{pith2026250604217,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: OWMM-Agent: Open World Mobile Manipulation With Multi-modal Agentic Data Synthesis},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HHIJDAOY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.04217}
}
read the original abstract

The rapid progress of navigation, manipulation, and vision models has made mobile manipulators capable in many specialized tasks. However, the open-world mobile manipulation (OWMM) task remains a challenge due to the need for generalization to open-ended instructions and environments, as well as the systematic complexity to integrate high-level decision making with low-level robot control based on both global scene understanding and current agent state. To address this complexity, we propose a novel multi-modal agent architecture that maintains multi-view scene frames and agent states for decision-making and controls the robot by function calling. A second challenge is the hallucination from domain shift. To enhance the agent performance, we further introduce an agentic data synthesis pipeline for the OWMM task to adapt the VLM model to our task domain with instruction fine-tuning. We highlight our fine-tuned OWMM-VLM as the first dedicated foundation model for mobile manipulators with global scene understanding, robot state tracking, and multi-modal action generation in a unified model. Through experiments, we demonstrate that our model achieves SOTA performance compared to other foundation models including GPT-4o and strong zero-shot generalization in real world. The project page is at https://github.com/HHYHRHY/OWMM-Agent

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.04217 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. OWMM-Agent Operates Fetch Robot for Tidying Task. OWMM-Agent receives natural language instructions and leverages both long-term environment memory (scene images) and transient robot state memory (textual summary) to generate sequential multi-modal actions to finish the task. By multi-turn, multi-image, and multi-modal VLM reasoning, the agent conducts global scene aware reasoning, updates robot state memory, and ac… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The Overview of OWMM Agent Framework. The left panel represents the world space, including a graph of posed frames generated during the pre-mapping phase and a real-time egocentric frame captured by the robot. The right panel showcases the Agent Space, where OWMM-VLM processes task instructions, robot history, and visual inputs to perform chain-of-thought reasoning and generate high-level actions with region coordin… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Overview of OWMM-VLM. Our model is fine-tuned on InternVL-2.5[5], comprising a ViT, a 2-layer projection MLP, and a LLM. During training, ViT parameters are frozen while the projection MLP and the LLM parameters are trainable. The model is required to generate multi-modal actions in JSON format conditioned on scene images, task instructions, and robot history. Intuitively, a VLM model requires three core multi-modal… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Word Cloud Distribution of Objects and Receptacles in our dataset D.2 Analysis on the training data This analysis tries to answer two questions: 1) How does the diversity of objects and environments affect the model’s performance on unseen objects and environments in t…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: OVMM-VLM-8B Sub-task Performance with the Increase of Training Data Size. The task scores consistently improve as the training data size increases. marginal gains decrease beyond a threshold. As performance gains plateau, egocentric decision making approaches a success…

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

49 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Mitigating hallucinations in large vision-language models by adaptively constraining information flow

    Jiaqi Bai, Hongcheng Guo, Zhongyuan Peng, Jian Yang, Zhoujun Li, Mohan Li, and Zhihong Tian. Mitigating hallucinations in large vision-language models by adaptively constraining information flow. In Proceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, volume 39, pages 23442–23450, 2025

    work page 2025

  2. [2]

    pi0: A vision-language-action flow model for general robot control

    Kevin Black, Noah Brown, Danny Driess, Adnan Esmail, Michael Equi, Chelsea Finn, Niccolo Fusai, Lachy Groom, Karol Hausman, Brian Ichter, et al. pi0: A vision-language-action flow model for general robot control. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24164, 2024

    arXiv

  3. [3]

    Internlm2 technical report

    Zheng Cai, Maosong Cao, Haojiong Chen, Kai Chen, Keyu Chen, Xin Chen, Xun Chen, Zehui Chen, Zhi Chen, Pei Chu, et al. Internlm2 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.17297, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    The ycb object and model set: Towards common benchmarks for manipulation research

    Berk Calli, Arjun Singh, Aaron Walsman, Siddhartha Srinivasa, Pieter Abbeel, and Aaron M Dollar. The ycb object and model set: Towards common benchmarks for manipulation research. In 2015 international conference on advanced robotics (ICAR), pages 510–517. IEEE, 2015

    work page 2015

  5. [5]

    Expanding performance boundaries of open-source multimodal models with model, data, and test-time scaling

    Zhe Chen, Weiyun Wang, Yue Cao, Yangzhou Liu, Zhangwei Gao, Erfei Cui, Jinguo Zhu, Shen- glong Ye, Hao Tian, Zhaoyang Liu, et al. Expanding performance boundaries of open-source multimodal models with model, data, and test-time scaling. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.05271, 2024

    arXiv 2024

  6. [6]

    Google scanned objects: A high-quality dataset of 3d scanned household items

    Laura Downs, Anthony Francis, Nate Koenig, Brandon Kinman, Ryan Hickman, Krista Rey- mann, Thomas B McHugh, and Vincent Vanhoucke. Google scanned objects: A high-quality dataset of 3d scanned household items. In 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 2553–2560. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  7. [7]

    Simultaneous localization and mapping: part i

    Hugh Durrant-Whyte and Tim Bailey. Simultaneous localization and mapping: part i. IEEE robotics & automation magazine, 13(2):99–110, 2006

    work page 2006

  8. [8]

    A survey on coverage path planning for robotics

    Enric Galceran and Marc Carreras. A survey on coverage path planning for robotics. Robotics and Autonomous systems, 61(12):1258–1276, 2013

    2013

Show all 49 references
  1. [9]

    Assistgui: Task-oriented desktop graphical user interface automation

    Difei Gao, Lei Ji, Zechen Bai, Mingyu Ouyang, Peiran Li, Dongxing Mao, Qinchen Wu, Weichen Zhang, Peiyi Wang, Xiangwu Guo, et al. Assistgui: Task-oriented desktop graphical user interface automation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.13108, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Rekep: Spatio- temporal reasoning of relational keypoint constraints for robotic manipulation

    Wenlong Huang, Chen Wang, Yunzhu Li, Ruohan Zhang, and Li Fei-Fei. Rekep: Spatio- temporal reasoning of relational keypoint constraints for robotic manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.01652, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Gpt-4o system card

    Aaron Hurst, Adam Lerer, Adam P Goucher, Adam Perelman, Aditya Ramesh, Aidan Clark, AJ Ostrow, Akila Welihinda, Alan Hayes, Alec Radford, et al. Gpt-4o system card. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.21276, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    The design of stretch: A compact, lightweight mobile manipulator for indoor human environments

    Charles C Kemp, Aaron Edsinger, Henry M Clever, and Blaine Matulevich. The design of stretch: A compact, lightweight mobile manipulator for indoor human environments. In 2022 International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 3150–3157. IEEE, 2022

    2022

  5. [13]

    Habitat synthetic scenes dataset (hssd-200): An analysis of 3d scene scale and realism tradeoffs for objectgoal navigation

    Mukul Khanna, Yongsen Mao, Hanxiao Jiang, Sanjay Haresh, Brennan Shacklett, Dhruv Batra, Alexander Clegg, Eric Undersander, Angel X Chang, and Manolis Savva. Habitat synthetic scenes dataset (hssd-200): An analysis of 3d scene scale and realism tradeoffs for objectgoal navigat...

    2024

  6. [14]

    Openvla: An open-source vision-language-action model

    Moo Jin Kim, Karl Pertsch, Siddharth Karamcheti, Ted Xiao, Ashwin Balakrishna, Suraj Nair, Rafael Rafailov, Ethan Foster, Grace Lam, Pannag Sanketi, et al. Openvla: An open-source vision-language-action model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09246, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    A survey on integration of large language models with intelligent robots

    Yeseung Kim, Dohyun Kim, Jieun Choi, Jisang Park, Nayoung Oh, and Daehyung Park. A survey on integration of large language models with intelligent robots. Intelligent Service Robotics, 17(5):1091–1107, 2024

    2024

  8. [16]

    Autowebglm: A large language model-based web navigating agent

    Hanyu Lai, Xiao Liu, Iat Long Iong, Shuntian Yao, Yuxuan Chen, Pengbo Shen, Hao Yu, Hanchen Zhang, Xiaohan Zhang, Yuxiao Dong, and Jie Tang. Autowebglm: A large language model-based web navigating agent. In Proceedings of the 30th ACM SIGKDD Conference on Knowledge Discovery a...

    2024

  9. [17]

    Code as policies: Language model programs for embodied control

    Jacky Liang, Wenlong Huang, Fei Xia, Peng Xu, Karol Hausman, Brian Ichter, Pete Florence, and Andy Zeng. Code as policies: Language model programs for embodied control. In 2023 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 9493–9500. IEEE, 2023

    2023

  10. [18]

    Moka: Open-vocabulary robotic manipulation through mark-based visual prompting

    Fangchen Liu, Kuan Fang, Pieter Abbeel, and Sergey Levine. Moka: Open-vocabulary robotic manipulation through mark-based visual prompting. In First Workshop on Vision-Language Models for Navigation and Manipulation at ICRA 2024, 2024

    2024

  11. [19]

    Ok-robot: What really matters in integrating open-knowledge models for robotics

    Peiqi Liu, Yaswanth Orru, Jay Vakil, Chris Paxton, Nur Muhammad Mahi Shafiullah, and Lerrel Pinto. Ok-robot: What really matters in integrating open-knowledge models for robotics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.12202, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    A survey on vision- language-action models for embodied ai

    Yueen Ma, Zixing Song, Yuzheng Zhuang, Jianye Hao, and Irwin King. A survey on vision- language-action models for embodied ai. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.14093, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Openeqa: Embodied question answering in the era of foundation models

    Arjun Majumdar, Anurag Ajay, Xiaohan Zhang, Pranav Putta, Sriram Yenamandra, Mikael Henaff, Sneha Silwal, Paul Mcvay, Oleksandr Maksymets, Sergio Arnaud, et al. Openeqa: Embodied question answering in the era of foundation models. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on C...

    2024

  14. [22]

    Howe, Craig A

    Drew McDermott, Malik Ghallab, Adele E. Howe, Craig A. Knoblock, Ashwin Ram, Manuela M. Veloso, Daniel S. Weld, and David E. Wilkins. Pddl-the planning domain definition language. 1998. URL https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusID:59656859

    1998

  15. [23]

    Uniteam: Open vocabulary mobile manipulation challenge

    Andrew Melnik, Michael Büttner, Leon Harz, Lyon Brown, Gora Chand Nandi, Arjun PS, Gaurav Kumar Yadav, Rahul Kala, and Robert Haschke. Uniteam: Open vocabulary mobile manipulation challenge. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.08611, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Pivot: Iterative visual prompting elicits actionable knowledge for vlms

    Soroush Nasiriany, Fei Xia, Wenhao Yu, Ted Xiao, Jacky Liang, Ishita Dasgupta, Annie Xie, Danny Driess, Ayzaan Wahid, Zhuo Xu, et al. Pivot: Iterative visual prompting elicits actionable knowledge for vlms. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.07872, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Habitat 3.0: A co-habitat for humans, avatars and robots

    Xavier Puig, Eric Undersander, Andrew Szot, Mikael Dallaire Cote, Tsung-Yen Yang, Ruslan Partsey, Ruta Desai, Alexander William Clegg, Michal Hlavac, So Yeon Min, et al. Habitat 3.0: A co-habitat for humans, avatars and robots. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.13724, 2023

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    Open-vocabulary mobile manipulation in unseen dynamic environments with 3d semantic maps

    Dicong Qiu, Wenzong Ma, Zhenfu Pan, Hui Xiong, and Junwei Liang. Open-vocabulary mobile manipulation in unseen dynamic environments with 3d semantic maps. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.18115, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Learning generalizable feature fields for mobile manipulation

    Ri-Zhao Qiu, Yafei Hu, Ge Yang, Yuchen Song, Yang Fu, Jianglong Ye, Jiteng Mu, Ruihan Yang, Nikolay Atanasov, Sebastian Scherer, et al. Learning generalizable feature fields for mobile manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.07563, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Learning hierarchical interactive multi-object search for mobile manipulation

    Fabian Schmalstieg, Daniel Honerkamp, Tim Welschehold, and Abhinav Valada. Learning hierarchical interactive multi-object search for mobile manipulation. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2023

    2023

  21. [29]

    The open motion planning library

    Ioan A Sucan, Mark Moll, and Lydia E Kavraki. The open motion planning library. IEEE Robotics & Automation Magazine, 19(4):72–82, 2012. 11

    2012

  22. [30]

    Aligning large multimodal models with factually augmented rlhf

    Zhiqing Sun, Sheng Shen, Shengcao Cao, Haotian Liu, Chunyuan Li, Yikang Shen, Chuang Gan, Liang-Yan Gui, Yu-Xiong Wang, Yiming Yang, et al. Aligning large multimodal models with factually augmented rlhf. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.14525, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Octo: An open-source generalist robot policy

    Octo Model Team, Dibya Ghosh, Homer Walke, Karl Pertsch, Kevin Black, Oier Mees, Sudeep Dasari, Joey Hejna, Tobias Kreiman, Charles Xu, et al. Octo: An open-source generalist robot policy. arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.12213, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models

    Hugo Touvron, Louis Martin, Kevin Stone, Peter Albert, Amjad Almahairi, Yasmine Babaei, Nikolay Bashlykov, Soumya Batra, Prajjwal Bhargava, Shruti Bhosale, et al. Llama 2: Open foundation and fine-tuned chat models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.09288, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Robi butler: Multimodal remote interaction with a household robot assistant, 2025

    Anxing Xiao, Nuwan Janaka, Tianrun Hu, Anshul Gupta, Kaixin Li, Cunjun Yu, and David Hsu. Robi butler: Multimodal remote interaction with a household robot assistant, 2025. URL https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.20548

    2025 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Adaptive mobile manipulation for articulated objects in the open world

    Haoyu Xiong, Russell Mendonca, Kenneth Shaw, and Deepak Pathak. Adaptive mobile manipulation for articulated objects in the open world. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.14403, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Qwen2 technical report

    An Yang, Baosong Yang, Binyuan Hui, Bo Zheng, Bowen Yu, Chang Zhou, Chengpeng Li, Chengyuan Li, Dayiheng Liu, Fei Huang, et al. Qwen2 technical report. arXiv preprint arXiv:2407.10671, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Thinking in space: How multimodal large language models see, remember, and recall spaces

    Jihan Yang, Shusheng Yang, Anjali W Gupta, Rilyn Han, Li Fei-Fei, and Saining Xie. Thinking in space: How multimodal large language models see, remember, and recall spaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.14171, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Homerobot: Open vocab mobile manipulation

    Sriram Yenamandra, Arun Ramachandran, Karmesh Yadav, Austin Wang, Mukul Khanna, Theophile Gervet, Tsung-Yen Yang, Vidhi Jain, Alex William Clegg, John Turner, Zsolt Kira, Manolis Savva, Angel Chang, Devendra Singh Chaplot, Dhruv Batra, Roozbeh Mottaghi, Yonatan Bisk, and Chris...

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Towards open-world mobile manipulation in homes: Lessons from the neurips 2023 homerobot open vocabulary mobile manipulation challenge

    Sriram Yenamandra, Arun Ramachandran, Mukul Khanna, Karmesh Yadav, Jay Vakil, An- drew Melnik, Michael Büttner, Leon Harz, Lyon Brown, Gora Chand Nandi, et al. Towards open-world mobile manipulation in homes: Lessons from the neurips 2023 homerobot open vocabulary mobile manip...

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Robopoint: A vision-language model for spatial affordance prediction for robotics

    Wentao Yuan, Jiafei Duan, Valts Blukis, Wilbert Pumacay, Ranjay Krishna, Adithyavairavan Murali, Arsalan Mousavian, and Dieter Fox. Robopoint: A vision-language model for spatial affordance prediction for robotics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.10721, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Appagent: Multimodal agents as smartphone users

    Chi Zhang, Zhao Yang, Jiaxuan Liu, Yanda Li, Yucheng Han, Xin Chen, Zebiao Huang, Bin Fu, and Gang Yu. Appagent: Multimodal agents as smartphone users. In Proceedings of the 2025 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1–20, 2025

    2025

  33. [41]

    Steve-eye: Equipping llm-based embodied agents with visual perception in open worlds

    Sipeng Zheng, Jiazheng Liu, Yicheng Feng, and Zongqing Lu. Steve-eye: Equipping llm-based embodied agents with visual perception in open worlds. arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.13255, 2023

    2023 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Closed-loop open-vocabulary mobile manipulation with gpt-4v

    Peiyuan Zhi, Zhiyuan Zhang, Muzhi Han, Zeyu Zhang, Zhitian Li, Ziyuan Jiao, Baoxiong Jia, and Siyuan Huang. Closed-loop open-vocabulary mobile manipulation with gpt-4v. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.10220, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Knowagent: Knowledge-augmented planning for llm-based agents

    Yuqi Zhu, Shuofei Qiao, Yixin Ou, Shumin Deng, Shiwei Lyu, Yue Shen, Lei Liang, Jinjie Gu, Huajun Chen, and Ningyu Zhang. Knowagent: Knowledge-augmented planning for llm-based agents. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.03101, 2024

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Tango: Training- free embodied ai agents for open-world tasks

    Filippo Ziliotto, Tommaso Campari, Luciano Serafini, and Lamberto Ballan. Tango: Training- free embodied ai agents for open-world tasks. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.10402, 2024. 12 A Impact Statement This work contributes to the long-term vision of creating generalist household ...

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    The embodiment prior for deciding the current action based on the ego-centric RGB image, especially how close the robot should be to interact with the target objects, can be learned in a data-driven approach

  38. [46]

    search scene frame

    The ability to comprehend multiple images or the multimodal context length may present one of the bottlenecks for VLM models to function as the core cognitive model for intelligent robots, particularly when scene-level understanding is essential. Table 6: Results with differen...

  39. [47]

    Beam search is a decoding algorithm widely used in language generation, main- taining a beam number of top candidate sequences at each step

    Beam Search. Beam search is a decoding algorithm widely used in language generation, main- taining a beam number of top candidate sequences at each step. Beam search enhances Ego-centric Decision-making and Affordance Grounding tasks, with minimal impact on Image Retrieval, bu...

  40. [48]

    Grounding Format. Replacing bounding box predictions with direct output coordinates reduces performance in Affordance Grounding, especially for objects (0.9251 → 0.6542) and receptacles (0.9060 → 0.6479). It is postulated that the large-scale visual grounding data in the pre-t...

  41. [49]

    Reasoning and Summarization. Removing reasoning and summarization capabilities leads to the worst performance across most metrics, with a decrease in Image Retrieval (0.7904 → 0.6586) and Ego-centric Decision-making (0.9672 → 0.9049). This highlights the critical role of reaso...

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.