Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

Leveraging OS-Level Primitives for Robotic Action Management

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A system layer that borrows OS concepts—context switching, exceptions, and replay—can make an unchanged pretrained robot policy generalize to longer repetitive tasks and finish them in fewer steps.

desk verdict A fresh OS-style system for VLA robots with a plausible design, an honest sensitivity study, and empirical claims that are more fragile and more task-specific than the abstract suggests. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.10259 v1 pith:NE73SSS6 submitted 2025-08-14 cs.OS

Wenxin Zheng , Boyang Li , Bin Xu , Erhu Feng , Jinyu Gu , Haibo Chen This is my paper
classification cs.OS
keywords vision-language-actionmodelsrobotactionmanagementOSprimitivescontextcachingexceptionhandlingreplayimitationlearninggeneralizationlong-horizonmanipulation
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 the poor generalization and sluggish execution of end-to-end robot policies on long, repetitive tasks are not purely modeling problems: a system layer that borrows classic operating-system ideas can fix much of it without retraining. It proposes AMS, which treats a contiguous run of action steps as an "action slice," analogous to a thread's time slice, and gives that slice context saving and restoring, exception interrupts, and record-and-replay. On top of an unchanged VLA policy, AMS reports real-robot success-rate improvements of 7x to 24x and end-to-end time savings of 29% to 74%, with most of the speedup coming from fewer action steps rather than faster inference. The sympathetic reading is that limited training data is compensated by system memory and fault recovery, so the same model weights do more.

What carries the argument

The central object is the action slice—a contiguous block of action steps produced by one model inference—treated as the atomic execution unit, like a thread's time slice. Three OS-inspired primitives operate on it. Action context is a layered pool storing KV caches, diffusion latents, and output embeddings, with two-phase hashing for indexing, reference-counted "virtual actions" for deduplication, and LRU-plus-priority eviction between GPU and CPU memory. Action exception is a CPU-side rule-based detector that divides an action slice into sub-slices, checks whether each action produced an observable effect (e.g., gripper gap exceeds zero, stick angle changes, force sensor reads above zero),

What would settle it

Instrument AMS on a pick-and-place task with deformable objects (for example soft cloth or sponge) where a failed grasp leaves joint angles and gripper gap within normal ranges. If the software-exception firing rate falls to near zero while task failures persist, and the success-rate advantage over direct inference drops from the full-stack level to roughly the context-only improvement reported in the ablation (20% for pick-and-place, 48% for single-arm movement), then the rule-based exception detector is the load-bearing component and its observable-outcome table is the limit of the approach.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the units of control produced by a VLA model—action slices—behave enough like thread time slices that classical OS primitives transfer directly to robot control. AMS saves and restores intermediate inference state (KV caches, diffusion latents, output embeddings) so that repeated or similar actions skip redundant computation; it splits each action slice into 2-to-5-step sub-slices and asynchronously checks rule-based expected outcomes (gripper gap, joint-angle change, force reading) so that a failed action raises an immediate "action exception" that halts the slice and rolls the arm back to a safe state; and when the model stalls or emits meaningless actions, a repl

Load-bearing premise

The exception mechanism assumes every failed action leaves a measurable trace—gripper gap, joint-angle change, or force reading—within a 2-to-5-step sub-slice; if a failure changes none of those signals, AMS cannot detect it and the error propagates.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The same pretrained policy can handle repetition counts beyond its training maximum: AMS with a one-object-trained model matched or beat a six-object fine-tuned model at the seventh object.
  • The reported speedups are mostly step reductions, not faster model inference: in real hardware AMS raises actions per second by only about 5%, but cuts steps by 29% to 74%, so the gains persist even when inference speed is not the bottleneck.
  • The mechanism is model-agnostic: gains appear with pi0, CogACT, and Octo without changing model weights, so the design can wrap future VLA policies unchanged.
  • Action context makes the second execution of a task cheaper than the first (5.7% to 20% fewer steps), implying that repeated or shift-long tasks accumulate benefit over time.
  • Simulation results (5x to 12x success-rate gains) are weaker than real-robot results, consistent with the exception mechanism depending on hardware-fault observability.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The scaling bottleneck is the hand-written rule table of expected outcomes; if those rules could be generated automatically, for example by an LLM checking whether an action produced its stated effect, AMS would extend to tasks where such rules are impractical to design by hand.
  • The reference-counted virtual-action cache suggests a natural extension to cross-task and cross-robot sharing: if structurally similar actions are hashed and deduplicated across tasks, context learned in one long-horizon job could seed another, going beyond within-task repetition.
  • Readers should interpret the headline multipliers with the near-zero baselines in mind: a 7x to 24x improvement is large partly because the direct-inference success rate is very low out of distribution; the absolute rates (about 70% for pick-and-place, 92% for single-arm movement) and the degradation curve are the more informative numbers.
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 / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes AMS, a system layer for vision-language-action (VLA) robotic policies that borrows three OS primitives: action context (caching and reusing KV caches, diffusion latents, and action trajectories), action exception (CPU-side monitoring of hardware/software conditions with sub-slice checks and rollback), and action replay (re-initializing diffusion from previously successful latents when the model stops producing meaningful actions). The system is implemented for the π0, CogACT, and Octo policies on a JAKA s5 real robot and in SimplerEnv simulation, with direct inference and VLA-Cache as baselines. The central claim is that AMS improves task success rates by 7x–24x and reduces end-to-end execution time by 29%–74% on long-horizon repetitive tasks without retraining the policy.

Significance. If the reported effects hold, the contribution is valuable and orthogonal to model-level improvements: it would show that an unchanged VLA policy can be made substantially more reliable and efficient on repetitive long-horizon tasks purely by system-level mechanisms. The paper correctly evaluates against external environments and external baselines, so the core claim is not definitionally circular. It also provides an ablation (Figure 18) and at least one sensitivity study (Table 4). However, the central empirical magnitudes are currently fragile: the headline success-rate figures have no error bars or trial counts, the largest gain component depends on a hand-written exception table whose coverage is not quantified, and the replay thresholds are free parameters with demonstrated sensitivity. These issues do not invalidate the systems idea, but they do mean the headline ratios are bounds for a narrow, carefully instrumented task class rather than established general results.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.2, Figures 14–15; §5.1, Figure 10] The headline claims ('7× to 24×' success-rate improvement, '29% to 74%' time saving) are presented as bars without trial counts, error bars, or statistical tests. The only explicit per-condition n in the paper is n=10 in Table 4. With n=10, 7× can be 7/10 vs 1/10, and 24× can be 24% vs 1%, i.e., a single successful trial separating the conditions. Please report per-condition n, confidence intervals or exact binomial intervals, and, where possible, paired trial results. Also state whether the reported ratios are of success counts or of success percentages.
  2. [§3.3.1, Table 3 + §5.5.1, Figure 18] The ablation attributes the largest single gain to action exception: for pick-and-place, adding exception raises success by about 40 points (from roughly 30% to 70%). This mechanism rests entirely on the hand-written 'expected outcome' predicates in Table 3 (gripper gap > 0, stick angle change, force sensor > 0). If a failed action produces no measurable delta in the monitored signals within the 2–5-step sub-slice, the exception never fires and the rollback never triggers; the paper itself notes in §6 that using LLMs to automate exception classification is future work. The reported gains are therefore conditional on the designer having pre-enumerated the failure modes of the evaluated task family. Please narrow the generalization claim, quantify the coverage of the exception table, and include a test with injected undetectable failures.
  3. [§5.5.2, Table 4] Replay-signal thresholds are free parameters, and the sensitivity data show very large variation. For the same two-ball pick-and-place task, success is 7/10 in row 1 but 3/10 in rows 5–6 when the gripper threshold changes from 0.5 to 5 or 10; total average steps vary by more than a factor of three (e.g., 322.3 vs 1283.7 in rows 4 and 6). This is load-bearing because replay is a major source of the generalization gain. The paper does not explain how the thresholds used in the main evaluation (Figures 10–15) were selected or whether they were tuned on the test tasks. Please provide a selection protocol and demonstrate that the headline results are stable across a reasonable threshold range.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract vs §5.1] The abstract states 'saving end-to-end execution time ranging from 29% to 74%', but §5.1 reports only 7%–15% for the first execution and 29%–74.4% for the second execution, when context reuse is warm. The abstract should state that the larger savings are for repeated executions.
  2. [Figure 11 caption] The caption reads 'Normalized Action Per Second to Direct Inference. Smaller is better.' If the quantity is normalized actions per second, smaller is worse; if smaller is better, the quantity is likely per-action time. Please correct the label/caption.
  3. [Figure 3] The claim that accuracy 'dropped significantly to zero' beyond the training repetition count is presented without trial counts or error bars. Please report the number of trials per point and per-condition counts.
  4. [Figure 8 caption] Typo: 'ankle' should be 'angle'.
  5. [§3.3.2] Typo: 'AMS follows he concept' should be 'AMS follows the concept'.
  6. [Figures 12 and 13] The x-axis labels '1 2' are ambiguous. Clarify whether they denote first/second execution, object count, or something else, and make the axis labels self-contained.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: AMS's gains are measured against external baselines and environments; the exception table and replay thresholds are hand-tuned engineering inputs, not self-defined predictions.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are empirical measurements against external baselines (direct inference, VLA-Cache) in SimplerEnv simulation and on a JAKA s5 physical robot. There is no derivation chain in which a predicted quantity is defined in terms of the inputs: the exception table (Table 3) specifies physical, observable expected outcomes (gripper gap, joint angle change, force reading), not the task-success metric; the success-rate ratios in Figures 14/15/18 are measured outcomes of the complete system. The replay and exception mechanisms are hand-crafted, and Section 6 explicitly concedes that threshold setup and exception classification require human effort and that LLM automation is future work; this is an external-validity limitation, not circularity. No load-bearing self-citations appear: the cited models, baselines, and benchmark environments are independent. The replay threshold sensitivity study (Section 5.5.2) tunes a hyperparameter on a closely related task, which could threaten generality but does not make the evaluated success rate equivalent to the tuning criterion by construction. I can exhibit no equation, definition, or self-citation chain that reduces the reported gains to the paper's own inputs, so the appropriate finding is no circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central claim is empirical, so the ledger captures the tuning knobs and domain premises the reported numbers depend on. The success-rate gains are modulated by hand-tuned replay thresholds and sub-slice lengths; the exception mechanism presumes per-action expected-outcome rules; replay presumes near-similar environments across repetitions. The paper's own Section 6 admits manual calibration effort and lack of transfer to unfamiliar tasks.

free parameters (5)
  • Replay signal threshold, arm joint movement = 1e-5 (Case 1, Table 4)
    Threshold on action-slice movement below which AMS declares the model stuck and triggers replay; Table 4 shows success varies from 3/10 to 7/10 across settings, so the chosen value materially sets the headline outcome.
  • Replay signal threshold, gripper movement = 1 (Cases 1-3, Table 4)
    Gripper threshold chosen separately from arm threshold; Cases 4-6 vary it from 0.5 to 10 and success drops to 3/10, so the value is load-bearing.
  • Sub-slice length for software exception checks = 2-5 steps (adaptive)
    Length set by current action intent with bounds 2 to 5 (Section 3.3.1); Figure 7 shows a trade-off between checking frequency and completion time/error rate.
  • Hardware exception thresholds = not quantified
    Table 2 lists 'too big torque', 'too big angular momentum', and collision as exceptions, but no numerical thresholds are given; these trigger the rollback mechanism.
  • Vision KV cache recomputation overhead = 'less than 10%' (asserted)
    Section 3.2.3 claims recomputing evicted vision KV caches costs under 10%; no measurement is shown, yet this justifies the eviction policy.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption VLA models emit a fixed block of action steps per inference round ('action slice')
    The entire slice-as-time-slice analogy and interruption design (Section 3.1) depends on this structural property of pi0, CogACT, and Octo.
  • domain assumption In real robots the hardware action rate is the bottleneck, so reducing step count matters more than accelerating inference
    Section 5.1 states hardware APS is usually lower than model APS; this justifies the design target and makes the 5% APS gain secondary to step reduction.
  • domain assumption Similar environments admit reuse of a previously successful action latent as diffusion initial noise
    Section 3.4.2 seeds inference with stored successful latents; the paper concedes in Section 6 that this fails for unfamiliar tasks, so its validity is restricted to near-similar repetitions.
  • ad hoc to paper Every action type has a compact observable expected outcome in joint/gripper state
    Table 3 defines these rules per action; they are hand-crafted and are the trigger for software exceptions, the largest success-rate contributor in the ablation (Section 5.5.1).
invented entities (3)
  • Action context pool
    purpose: Layered store for KV caches, diffusion latents, output embeddings, and action trajectories across inference rounds
    Internal abstraction; its utility is demonstrated only through this paper's benchmarks, with no external falsifiable handle.
  • Virtual action
    purpose: Reference-counted deduplicated action records addressed by two-phase hash index, analogous to shared pages
    Software data structure for storage compression (Section 3.2.3); no independent evidence.
  • Action atomization
    purpose: One-DoF atomic action units used to reset the robot arm to a safe state after hardware exceptions
    Rollback mechanism (Section 3.3.2); plausible but only validated inside the paper's tests. These are software abstractions rather than physical postulates, so the graviton problem is mild.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Leveraging OS-Level Primitives for Robotic Action Management." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NE73SSS6

@misc{pith2026250810259,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Leveraging OS-Level Primitives for Robotic Action Management},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NE73SSS6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.10259}
}
read the original abstract

End-to-end imitation learning frameworks (e.g., VLA) are increasingly prominent in robotics, as they enable rapid task transfer by learning directly from perception to control, eliminating the need for complex hand-crafted features. However, even when employing SOTA VLA-based models, they still exhibit limited generalization capabilities and suboptimal action efficiency, due to the constraints imposed by insufficient robotic training datasets. In addition to addressing this problem using model-based approaches, we observe that robotic action slices, which consist of contiguous action steps, exhibit strong analogies to the time slices of threads in traditional operating systems. This insight presents a novel opportunity to tackle the problem at the system level. In this paper, we propose AMS, a robot action management system enhanced with OS-level primitives like exception, context switch and record-and-replay, that improves both execution efficiency and success rates of robotic tasks. AMS first introduces action exception, which facilitates the immediate interruption of robotic actions to prevent error propagation. Secondly, AMS proposes action context, which eliminates redundant computations for VLA-based models, thereby accelerating execution efficiency in robotic actions. Finally, AMS leverages action replay to facilitate repetitive or similar robotic tasks without the need for re-training efforts. We implement AMS in both an emulated environment and on a real robot platform. The evaluation results demonstrate that AMS significantly enhances the model's generalization ability and action efficiency, achieving task success rate improvements ranging from 7x to 24x and saving end-to-end execution time ranging from 29% to 74% compared to existing robotic system without AMS support.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2508.10259 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. A failure case of the robot’s pick-and-place [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. State-of-the-art VLA model structure. It usu￾ally combines three models: visual encoders, large language model, and action decoders (e.g., diffusion model). The natural language processing component is responsible for interpreting the user’s natural language commands and converting them to text vectors. The environment percep￾tion component gathers information about the surroundings. It collects 2D images or 3D poin… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Degrading of different models. The number in the brackets means the maximum repetition counts in the training set. Key Challenges: To enhance the model’s generalization ability, our work mainly focuses on classical robotic sce￾narios, specifically long-horizon tasks that involve multiple repetitive jobs. We first adopt a straw-man design: resetting the model’s internal state and regenerating robotic actions [PITH_F… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (14 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Strawman design of resetting the model in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The overall design of AMS enabled inference process for robotic models. ViT Put the cubes into the bowl. LLM Visual -Language Model Diffusion / Transformer { Context Key : (Context Value...) } Image Text KV Cache Diffusion Noise Action, Output Context Pool Save Retriev…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The structure of action context for multi-layer [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_6.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Robot physical state reset. A1, A2, A3 repre￾sent the different ankle of the model. When synthesizing action slices, computation is based on robot configuration and might be different from direct addition. #1, #2, #3 repre￾sent the different action atomization operatio…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Trade-off between checking frequency and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Implementation of AMS. The AMS system con￾tains several key components: Action context pool manager, action exception handler and action replay signal trigger (replay monitor in the figure). 5 Evaluation To show the performance of AMS, we conducted both real￾world robo…
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Actions Per Second test. Evaluate the overall APS of the robotic system with and w/o AMS support. APS (Actions Per Second) We measured the APS to test how AMS accelerates individual step inference. The results are shown in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_11.png]
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: End-to-end efficiency evaluation for the first [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_10.png]
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Execution steps of 𝜋0 model for different tasks in real-world scenario. “Cubes” represents picking all cubes and placing into the bowl. “Cups” represents pulling down all cups. “Mixed” represents arranging the whole desk which contains cubes and cups. 1 2 (a) CogACT 0…
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Success rates of 𝜋0 model for different tasks in real-world scenario. “Cubes” represents picking all cubes and placing into the bowl. “Cups” represents pulling down all cups. “Mixed” represents arranging the whole desk which contains cubes and cups. In simulation envi…
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Execution steps in the simulation scenario [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_13.png]
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Success rates in simulation scenario with [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_15.png]
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Model output action for “picking all cubes and placing into the bowl” job by model [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_16.png]
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Comparison between AMS and algorithm￾based solution in real-world robots. Number in the brack￾ets means the maximum repetition counts of pulling in the training set. false negatives, but the occurrence of false positives is high, which can affect performance and even …

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. KERV: Kinematic-Rectified Speculative Decoding for Embodied VLA Models

    cs.RO 2026-03 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    KERV integrates kinematic Kalman Filter predictions with speculative decoding in VLA models to achieve 27-37% faster inference while maintaining nearly the same task success rates.

  2. PolicyTrim: Boosting Intrinsic Policy Efficiency of Vision-Language-Action Models

    cs.CV 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    PolicyTrim is an RL post-training framework that boosts VLA policy efficiency by 3x chunk utilization and 51.4% fewer steps, yielding up to 5.83x speedup.

  3. Escaping the Diversity Trap in Robotic Manipulation via Anchor-Centric Adaptation

    cs.RO 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Anchor-Centric Adaptation escapes the diversity trap by prioritizing repeated demonstrations at core anchors over broad coverage, yielding higher success rates under fixed data budgets in robotic manipulation.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

81 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Adilzhan Adilkhanov, Amir Yelenov, Assylkhan Seitzhanov, Ayan Mazhitov, Azamat Abdikarimov, Danissa Sandykbayeva, Daryn Ken- zhebek, Dinmukhammed Mukashev, Ilyas Umurbekov, Jabrail Chu- makov, et al. 2025. Survey on Vision-Language-Action Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.06851 (2025)

    work page Pith review arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    Kevin Black, Noah Brown, Danny Driess, Adnan Esmail, Michael Equi, Chelsea Finn, Niccolo Fusai, Lachy Groom, Karol Hausman, Brian Ichter, Szymon Jakubczak, Tim Jones, Liyiming Ke, Sergey Levine, Adrian Li-Bell, Mohith Mothukuri, Suraj Nair, Karl Pertsch, Lucy Xiaoyang Shi, James Tanner, Quan Vuong, Anna Walling, Hao- huan Wang, and Ury Zhilinsky. 2024. 𝜋0...

    arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    Anthony Brohan, Noah Brown, Justice Carbajal, Yevgen Chebotar, Joseph Dabis, Chelsea Finn, Keerthana Gopalakrishnan, Karol Haus- man, Alex Herzog, Jasmine Hsu, et al. 2022. Rt-1: Robotics transformer for real-world control at scale. arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.06817 (2022)

    arXiv 2022

  4. [4]

    Joao Carvalho, A Le, Piotr Kicki, Dorothea Koert, and Jan Peters

  5. [5]

    Liang Chen, Haozhe Zhao, Tianyu Liu, Shuai Bai, Junyang Lin, Chang Zhou, and Baobao Chang. 2024. An image is worth 1/2 tokens after layer 2: Plug-and-play inference acceleration for large vision-language models. In European Conference on Computer Vision . Springer, 19–35

    work page 2024

  6. [6]

    Sijin Chen, Xin Chen, Anqi Pang, Xianfang Zeng, Wei Cheng, Yijun Fu, Fukun Yin, Billzb Wang, Jingyi Yu, Gang Yu, et al. 2024. Meshxl: Neural coordinate field for generative 3d foundation models.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 37 (2024), 97141–97166

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    Shizhe Chen, Ricardo Garcia, Cordelia Schmid, and Ivan Laptev. 2023. Polarnet: 3d point clouds for language-guided robotic manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.15596 (2023)

    arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Cheng Chi, Zhenjia Xu, Siyuan Feng, Eric Cousineau, Yilun Du, Ben- jamin Burchfiel, Russ Tedrake, and Shuran Song. 2023. Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action diffusion. The Interna- tional Journal of Robotics Research (2023), 02783649241273668

    work page 2023

Show all 81 references
  1. [9]

    Suhyung Choi, Youngseok Joo, Jun Ki Lee, and Byoung-Tak Zhang

  2. [10]

    Sharmita Dey. 2025. Redefining Robot Generalization Through Inter- active Intelligence. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.05963 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Alexey Dosovitskiy, Lucas Beyer, Alexander Kolesnikov, Dirk Weis- senborn, Xiaohua Zhai, Thomas Unterthiner, Mostafa Dehghani, Matthias Minderer, Georg Heigold, Sylvain Gelly, Jakob Uszkoreit, and Neil Houlsby. 2021. An Image is Worth 16x16 Words: Trans- formers for Image Reco...

    2021 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Oluwami Dosunmu-Ogunbi, Aayushi Shrivastava, and Jessy W Grizzle

  5. [13]

    Danny Driess, Fei Xia, Mehdi SM Sajjadi, Corey Lynch, Aakanksha Chowdhery, Ayzaan Wahid, Jonathan Tompson, Quan Vuong, Tianhe Yu, Wenlong Huang, et al. 2023. Palm-e: An embodied multimodal 13 Wenxin Zheng, Boyang Li, Bin Xu, Erhu Feng, Jinyu Gu, Haibo Chen language model. (2023)

    2023

  6. [14]

    Hao-Shu Fang, Hongjie Fang, Zhenyu Tang, Jirong Liu, Chenxi Wang, Junbo Wang, Haoyi Zhu, and Cewu Lu. 2024. Rh20t: A comprehensive robotic dataset for learning diverse skills in one-shot. In 2024 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) . IEEE, 653–660

    2024

  7. [15]

    In 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS)

    Demonstrating a Robust Walking Algorithm for Underactuated Bipedal Robots in Non-flat, Non-stationary Environments. In 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 11210–11217

    2024

  8. [16]

    Dayuan Fu, Keqing He, Yejie Wang, Wentao Hong, Zhuoma Gongque, Weihao Zeng, Wei Wang, Jingang Wang, Xunliang Cai, and Weiran Xu. 2025. AgentRefine: Enhancing Agent Generalization through Refinement Tuning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.01702 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Zipeng Fu, Tony Z Zhao, and Chelsea Finn. 2024. Mobile aloha: Learn- ing bimanual mobile manipulation with low-cost whole-body teleop- eration. arXiv preprint arXiv:2401.02117 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Roya Firoozi, Johnathan Tucker, Stephen Tian, Anirudha Majumdar, Jiankai Sun, Weiyu Liu, Yuke Zhu, Shuran Song, Ashish Kapoor, Karol Hausman, et al. 2023. Foundation models in robotics: Applications, challenges, and the future. The International Journal of Robotics Re- search ...

    2023

  11. [19]

    Theophile Gervet, Zhou Xian, Nikolaos Gkanatsios, and Katerina Fragkiadaki. 2023. Act3d: 3d feature field transformers for multi-task robotic manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.17817 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Ankit Goyal, Jie Xu, Yijie Guo, Valts Blukis, Yu-Wei Chao, and Dieter Fox. 2023. Rvt: Robotic view transformer for 3d object manipulation. In Conference on Robot Learning . PMLR, 694–710

    2023

  13. [21]

    Abraham George and Amir Barati Farimani. 2023. One act play: Single demonstration behavior cloning with action chunking transformers. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.10175 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Pierre-Louis Guhur, Shizhe Chen, Ricardo Garcia Pinel, Makarand Tapaswi, Ivan Laptev, and Cordelia Schmid. 2023. Instruction-driven history-aware policies for robotic manipulations. In Conference on Robot Learning. PMLR, 175–187

    2023

  15. [23]

    Yanjiang Guo, Jianke Zhang, Xiaoyu Chen, Xiang Ji, Yen-Jen Wang, Yucheng Hu, and Jianyu Chen. 2025. Improving Vision-Language- Action Model with Online Reinforcement Learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.16664 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Albert Gu and Tri Dao. 2023. Mamba: Linear-time sequence modeling with selective state spaces. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.00752 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Zhi Hou, Tianyi Zhang, Yuwen Xiong, Haonan Duan, Hengjun Pu, Ronglei Tong, Chengyang Zhao, Xizhou Zhu, Yu Qiao, Jifeng Dai, et al. 2025. Dita: Scaling Diffusion Transformer for Generalist Vision- Language-Action Policy. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.19757 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Haoxu Huang, Fanqi Lin, Yingdong Hu, Shengjie Wang, and Yang Gao. 2024. Copa: General robotic manipulation through spatial con- straints of parts with foundation models. In2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) . IEEE, 9488–9495

    2024

  19. [27]

    Huy Ha, Pete Florence, and Shuran Song. 2023. Scaling up and distilling down: Language-guided robot skill acquisition. In Conference on Robot Learning. PMLR, 3766–3777

    2023

  20. [28]

    JAKA. 2025. JAKA Robots. https://www.jaka.com/en/index [Online; accessed 2025-04-18]

    2025

  21. [29]

    Stephen James, Kentaro Wada, Tristan Laidlow, and Andrew J Davi- son. 2022. Coarse-to-fine q-attention: Efficient learning for visual robotic manipulation via discretisation. In Proceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition . 13739–13748

    2022

  22. [30]

    Yutaro Ishida, Yuki Noguchi, Takayuki Kanai, Kazuhiro Shintani, and Hiroshi Bito. 2024. Robust Imitation Learning for Mobile Manipulator Focusing on Task-Related Viewpoints and Regions. In 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) . IEEE, ...

    2024

  23. [31]

    Michael Janner, Yilun Du, Joshua B Tenenbaum, and Sergey Levine

  24. [32]

    Kai Jiang and Jiaxing Huang. 2024. A Survey on Vision Autoregressive Model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.08666 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Eric Jang, Alex Irpan, Mohi Khansari, Daniel Kappler, Frederik Ebert, Corey Lynch, Sergey Levine, and Chelsea Finn. 2022. Bc-z: Zero-shot task generalization with robotic imitation learning. In Conference on Robot Learning. PMLR, 991–1002

    2022

  26. [34]

    Moo Jin Kim, Chelsea Finn, and Percy Liang. 2025. Fine-tuning vision- language-action models: Optimizing speed and success. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.19645 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  27. [35]

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

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Qixiu Li, Yaobo Liang, Zeyu Wang, Lin Luo, Xi Chen, Mozheng Liao, Fangyun Wei, Yu Deng, Sicheng Xu, Yizhong Zhang, et al . 2024. Cogact: A foundational vision-language-action model for synergiz- ing cognition and action in robotic manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.19650 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Joohyung Kim, Dhruv C Mathur, Kazuki Shin, and Sean Taylor

  30. [38]

    Xiang Li, Cristina Mata, Jongwoo Park, Kumara Kahatapitiya, Yoo Sung Jang, Jinghuan Shang, Kanchana Ranasinghe, Ryan Burgert, Mu Cai, Yong Jae Lee, et al. 2024. Llara: Supercharging robot learn- ing data for vision-language policy. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.20095 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Yinghui Li, Jinze Wu, Xin Liu, Weizhong Guo, and Yufei Xue. 2024. Experience-Learning Inspired Two-Step Reward Method for Efficient Legged Locomotion Learning Towards Natural and Robust Gaits. In 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Sys- tems (IROS)...

    2024

  32. [40]

    Yunfei Li, Ying Yuan, Jingzhi Cui, Haoran Huan, Wei Fu, Jiaxuan Gao, Zekai Xu, and Yi Wu. 2024. Robot Generating Data for Learning Gen- eralizable Visual Robotic Manipulation. In 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS) . IEEE, 5813–5820

    2024

  33. [41]

    Ji Lin, Jiaming Tang, Haotian Tang, Shang Yang, Guangxuan Xiao, and Song Han. 2025. AWQ: Activation-aware Weight Quantization for On-Device LLM Compression and Acceleration. GetMobile: Mobile Computing and Communications 28, 4 (2025), 12–17

    2025

  34. [42]

    Xuanlin Li, Kyle Hsu, Jiayuan Gu, Karl Pertsch, Oier Mees, Homer Rich Walke, Chuyuan Fu, Ishikaa Lunawat, Isabel Sieh, Sean Kirmani, Sergey Levine, Jiajun Wu, Chelsea Finn, Hao Su, Quan Vuong, and Ted Xiao. 2024. Evaluating Real-World Robot Manipulation Policies in Simulation....

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Yueen Ma, Dafeng Chi, Shiguang Wu, Yuecheng Liu, Yuzheng Zhuang, Jianye Hao, and Irwin King. 2024. Actra: Optimized transformer ar- chitecture for vision-language-action models in robot learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.01147 (2024)

    2024

  36. [44]

    Cheng Pan, Kai Junge, and Josie Hughes. 2024. Vision-language-action model and diffusion policy switching enables dexterous control of an anthropomorphic hand. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.14022 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    J Hyeon Park, Wonhyuk Choi, Sunpyo Hong, Hoseong Seo, Joonmo Ahn, Changsu Ha, Heungwoo Han, and Junghyun Kwon. 2024. Hi- erarchical Action Chunking Transformer: Learning Temporal Multi- modality from Demonstrations with Fast Imitation Behavior. In 2024 IEEE/RSJ International C...

    2024

  38. [46]

    Seongmin Park, Hyungmin Kim, Wonseok Jeon, Juyoung Yang, Byeongwook Jeon, Yoonseon Oh, and Jungwook Choi. 2024. Quantization-Aware Imitation-Learning for Resource-Efficient 14 Leveraging OS-Level Primitives for Robotic Action Management Robotic Control. arXiv preprint arXiv:24...

    2024 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Jiaming Liu, Mengzhen Liu, Zhenyu Wang, Lily Lee, Kaichen Zhou, Pengju An, Senqiao Yang, Renrui Zhang, Yandong Guo, and Shang- hang Zhang. 2024. Robomamba: Multimodal state space model for efficient robot reasoning and manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.04339 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Alec Radford, Jong Wook Kim, Chris Hallacy, Aditya Ramesh, Gabriel Goh, Sandhini Agarwal, Girish Sastry, Amanda Askell, Pamela Mishkin, Jack Clark, Gretchen Krueger, and Ilya Sutskever. 2021. Learn- ing Transferable Visual Models From Natural Language Supervision. arXiv:2103.0...

    2021 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Gernot Riegler, Ali Osman Ulusoy, and Andreas Geiger. 2017. Octnet: Learning deep 3d representations at high resolutions. In Proceedings of the IEEE conference on computer vision and pattern recognition . 3577– 3586

    2017

  42. [50]

    Trossen Robotics. 2025. Trossen Robotics. https://www. trossenrobotics.com/ [Online; accessed 2025-04-18]

    2025

  43. [51]

    Noah Shinn, Federico Cassano, Ashwin Gopinath, Karthik Narasimhan, and Shunyu Yao. 2023. Reflexion: Language agents with verbal reinforcement learning. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 36 (2023), 8634–8652

    2023

  44. [52]

    Karl Pertsch, Kyle Stachowicz, Brian Ichter, Danny Driess, Suraj Nair, Quan Vuong, Oier Mees, Chelsea Finn, and Sergey Levine. 2025. Fast: Efficient action tokenization for vision-language-action models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.09747 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Mohit Shridhar, Xingdi Yuan, Marc-Alexandre Côté, Yonatan Bisk, Adam Trischler, and Matthew Hausknecht. 2020. Alfworld: Align- ing text and embodied environments for interactive learning. arXiv preprint arXiv:2010.03768 (2020)

    2020 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Wenxuan Song, Jiayi Chen, Pengxiang Ding, Han Zhao, Wei Zhao, Zhide Zhong, Zongyuan Ge, Jun Ma, and Haoang Li. 2025. Accelerating Vision-Language-Action Model Integrated with Action Chunking via Parallel Decoding. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.02310 (2025)

    2025

  47. [55]

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

    2024 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Chenxi Wang, Hongjie Fang, Hao-Shu Fang, and Cewu Lu. 2024. Rise: 3d perception makes real-world robot imitation simple and effective. In 2024 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS). IEEE, 2870–2877

    2024

  49. [57]

    Mohit Shridhar, Lucas Manuelli, and Dieter Fox. 2023. Perceiver-actor: A multi-task transformer for robotic manipulation. In Conference on Robot Learning. PMLR, 785–799

    2023

  50. [58]

    Junjie Wen, Yichen Zhu, Jinming Li, Minjie Zhu, Zhibin Tang, Kun Wu, Zhiyuan Xu, Ning Liu, Ran Cheng, Chaomin Shen, et al . 2025. Tinyvla: Towards fast, data-efficient vision-language-action models for robotic manipulation. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters (2025)

    2025

  51. [59]

    Kun Wu, Chengkai Hou, Jiaming Liu, Zhengping Che, Xiaozhu Ju, Zhuqin Yang, Meng Li, Yinuo Zhao, Zhiyuan Xu, Guang Yang, et al

  52. [60]

    Zhiheng Xi, Wenxiang Chen, Xin Guo, Wei He, Yiwen Ding, Boyang Hong, Ming Zhang, Junzhe Wang, Senjie Jin, Enyu Zhou, et al. 2025. The rise and potential of large language model based agents: A survey. Science China Information Sciences 68, 2 (2025), 121101

    2025

  53. [61]

    Shenghao Xie, Wenqiang Zu, Mingyang Zhao, Duo Su, Shilong Liu, Ruohua Shi, Guoqi Li, Shanghang Zhang, and Lei Ma. 2024. Towards Unifying Understanding and Generation in the Era of Vision Foun- dation Models: A Survey from the Autoregression Perspective. arXiv preprint arXiv:24...

    2024 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Junjie Wen, Minjie Zhu, Yichen Zhu, Zhibin Tang, Jinming Li, Zhongyi Zhou, Chengmeng Li, Xiaoyu Liu, Yaxin Peng, Chaomin Shen, et al

  55. [63]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.03293 (2024)

    Diffusion-VLA: Scaling Robot Foundation Models via Unified Diffusion and Autoregression. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.03293 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Xinyu Xu, Yizheng Zhang, Yong-Lu Li, Lei Han, and Cewu Lu. 2024. Humanvla: Towards vision-language directed object rearrangement by physical humanoid. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.19972 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Yang Yue, Yulin Wang, Bingyi Kang, Yizeng Han, Shenzhi Wang, Shiji Song, Jiashi Feng, and Gao Huang. 2024. Deer-vla: Dynamic inference of multimodal large language models for efficient robot execution. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 37 (2024), 56619– 56643

    2024

  58. [66]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.13877 (2024)

    Robomind: Benchmark on multi-embodiment intelligence nor- mative data for robot manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.13877 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Jianke Zhang, Yanjiang Guo, Yucheng Hu, Xiaoyu Chen, Xiang Zhu, and Jianyu Chen. 2025. UP-VLA: A Unified Understanding and Pre- diction Model for Embodied Agent. arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.18867 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Xinyu Zhang, Yuhan Liu, Haonan Chang, Liam Schramm, and Ab- deslam Boularias. 2025. Autoregressive action sequence learning for robotic manipulation. IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters (2025)

    2025

  61. [69]

    Weimin Xiong, Yifan Song, Xiutian Zhao, Wenhao Wu, Xun Wang, Ke Wang, Cheng Li, Wei Peng, and Sujian Li. 2024. Watch every step! llm agent learning via iterative step-level process refinement. arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.11176 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Siyu Xu, Yunke Wang, Chenghao Xia, Dihao Zhu, Tao Huang, and Chang Xu. 2025. VLA-Cache: Towards Efficient Vision-Language- Action Model via Adaptive Token Caching in Robotic Manipulation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.02175 (2025)

    2025

  63. [71]

    Tony Z Zhao, Vikash Kumar, Sergey Levine, and Chelsea Finn. 2023. Learning fine-grained bimanual manipulation with low-cost hardware. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.13705 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Wangbo Zhao, Jiasheng Tang, Yizeng Han, Yibing Song, Kai Wang, Gao Huang, Fan Wang, and Yang You. 2024. Dynamic tuning towards parameter and inference efficiency for vit adaptation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.11808 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Yanjie Ze, Zixuan Chen, Wenhao Wang, Tianyi Chen, Xialin He, Ying Yuan, Xue Bin Peng, and Jiajun Wu. 2024. Generalizable humanoid manipulation with improved 3d diffusion policies. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.10803 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  66. [76]

    Yuan Zhang, Chun-Kai Fan, Junpeng Ma, Wenzhao Zheng, Tao Huang, Kuan Cheng, Denis Gudovskiy, Tomoyuki Okuno, Yohei Nakata, Kurt Keutzer, et al. 2024. Sparsevlm: Visual token sparsification for efficient vision-language model inference. arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.04417 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  67. [77]

    Qingqing Zhao, Yao Lu, Moo Jin Kim, Zipeng Fu, Zhuoyang Zhang, Yecheng Wu, Zhaoshuo Li, Qianli Ma, Song Han, Chelsea Finn, et al

  68. [78]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.22020 (2025)

    CoT-VLA: Visual Chain-of-Thought Reasoning for Vision- Language-Action Models. arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.22020 (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  69. [81]

    Haoyu Zhen, Xiaowen Qiu, Peihao Chen, Jincheng Yang, Xin Yan, Yilun Du, Yining Hong, and Chuang Gan. 2024. 3d-vla: A 3d vision-language-action generative world model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.09631 (2024). 15

    2024 arXiv

  70. [2022]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.09991 (2022)

    Planning with diffusion for flexible behavior synthesis. arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.09991 (2022)

    2022 arXiv

  71. [2023]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.09655 (2023)

    Papras: Plug-and-play robotic arm system. arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.09655 (2023)

    2023 arXiv

  72. [2024]

    Motion planning diffusion: Learning and adapting robot motion planning with diffusion models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.19948 (2024)

    2024 arXiv

  73. [2025]

    Mixture of Action Expert Embeddings: Multi-Task ACT. (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.