Closed-Loop Neural Activation Control in Vision-Language-Action Models

Abhijith Babu; Anirban Roy; Nathaniel D. Bastian; Olivera Kotevska; Ramneet Kaur; Sumit Kumar Jha; Susmit Jha; Yanzhao Wu

arxiv: 2606.00269 · v1 · pith:VDIX3QM7new · submitted 2026-05-29 · 💻 cs.AI

Closed-Loop Neural Activation Control in Vision-Language-Action Models

Abhijith Babu , Ramneet Kaur , Nathaniel D. Bastian , Olivera Kotevska , Susmit Jha , Yanzhao Wu , Sumit Kumar Jha , Anirban Roy This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 22:22 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.AI

keywords vision-language-action modelsclosed-loop controlneural activation steeringconcept regulationPID controllerreinforcement learning controllerLIBERO benchmarkOpenVLA

0 comments

The pith

Closed-loop feedback replaces fixed coefficients to stabilize steering of temporal concepts in VLA models.

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

The paper shows that fixed-coefficient steering in vision-language-action models produces overcorrection and oscillation on time-varying behaviors such as speed and smoothness. CTRL-STEER addresses this by decoupling the selection of steering directions from the online adjustment of their strength. Motion-aligned residual directions carry the representation while a feedback controller, instantiated as either PID or reinforcement learning, varies the intervention magnitude in response to observed error. Experiments on a fine-tuned OpenVLA policy across four LIBERO suites demonstrate improved concept stability and a superior steering-to-task-success trade-off without any model modification or retraining.

Core claim

Steering along motion-aligned residual directions while a separate feedback controller dynamically adjusts intervention magnitude produces more stable regulation of temporal concepts than static coefficients, without changing the underlying VLA policy.

What carries the argument

CTRL-STEER framework, which decouples representation via motion-aligned residual directions from regulation via an online feedback controller that varies steering strength.

If this is right

Regulation of speed and smoothness becomes stable across task duration rather than oscillating.
The steering-task success trade-off improves relative to any fixed-coefficient method.
The same base model can be used for both unsteered and adaptively steered behavior without retraining.
Both PID and reinforcement-learning controllers can be substituted inside the same residual-direction framework.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The separation of direction choice from magnitude control may generalize to other forms of test-time intervention in sequence models.
Real-time robotic deployment could benefit from the reduced oscillation when safety depends on smooth motion.
Different sensor feedback signals could be routed to the controller without altering the residual directions.
The method leaves open the possibility of learning the residual directions themselves from interaction data.

Load-bearing premise

Temporal concepts can be separated from the base representation by choosing motion-aligned residual directions while a feedback loop alone handles the time-varying strength of the intervention.

What would settle it

A direct comparison on the same OpenVLA policy and LIBERO tasks in which the closed-loop controller produces equal or greater oscillation and lower task success than the best fixed-coefficient baseline.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.00269 by Abhijith Babu, Anirban Roy, Nathaniel D. Bastian, Olivera Kotevska, Ramneet Kaur, Sumit Kumar Jha, Susmit Jha, Yanzhao Wu.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Left: Example of steering the height concept for the task: Put the yellow and white mug in the microwave and close it. The goal is to steer the arm to the desired direction, e.g., a larger height. Right: i. The unsteered VLA model follows a low trajectory and fails to place the mug correctly. ii. Static steering of VLA drastically increases the trajectory height and collides with the microwave top. iii. CT… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: We present CTRL-STEER for controlled steering of VLA models. First, we identify feature-aligned neurons by projecting [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Qualitative examples on steering-success tradeoff that lead to failed tasks in static steering (left) [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: Effect of steering on the task ‘put both the alphabet soup and the cream cheese box in the basket’. The unsteered model fails in some episodes. Static steering often prevents the robot from successfully grasping the first object, resulting in lower task success and reduced end-effector height. In contrast, closed-loop steering by CTRL-STEER enables successful task completion while maintaining a higher end-… view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: Breakdown of the per-timestep computational cost for CTRL-STEER with only PID (left) and RL+PID (right). The VLA forward [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Breakdown of the average per-timestep computational cost for CTRL-STEER with only PID (left) and RL+PID (right). The VLA forward pass dominates the runtime in both cases, while the additional computations required for controlled steering contribute a very low overhead [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 8.** Figure 8: Trade-off between task success and computational cost across steering methods. Bars indicate task success rate, while the red [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_8.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models can be steered at test time by intervening on semantically meaningful internal directions, but existing methods use a fixed steering coefficient, effectively operating in open loop. This is poorly suited to embodied control, where task state and concept error evolve over time, often causing overcorrection, oscillation, and reduced task success, especially for temporal behaviors such as speed and smoothness. We propose CTRL-STEER, a closed-loop framework that replaces static intervention strength with adaptive, time-varying control signals. The key idea is to decouple representation from regulation: rather than assuming temporal concepts are directly controlled by individual neurons, we steer along motion-aligned residual directions while a feedback controller adjusts intervention magnitude online. We instantiate this framework with both PID and reinforcement learning based controllers. Experiments with a fine-tuned OpenVLA policy on four LIBERO task suites show that CTRL-STEER achieves more stable concept regulation and a better steering-task success trade-off than fixed-coefficient baselines, without modifying or retraining the base model.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

CTRL-STEER adds a feedback controller on top of motion-aligned residual steering for VLA models, but the abstract supplies no numbers or method details to evaluate the claimed gains.

read the letter

The paper's core move is to replace fixed steering coefficients in test-time intervention on VLA models with an adaptive controller. They steer along motion-aligned residual directions and let a PID or RL loop adjust the intervention strength based on observed concept error over time. This targets the practical problem that open-loop steering produces oscillation or overcorrection when task state changes, especially for temporal properties like speed.

The approach keeps the base model frozen, which is a clear practical advantage for embodied settings. The decoupling of representation (the residual directions) from regulation (the online controller) is a straightforward way to handle time-varying needs without retraining.

The main limitation is that the abstract states improved stability and a better steering-success trade-off on four LIBERO suites but provides no quantitative results, error bars, controller equations, or description of how the residual directions are found. Without those, the empirical claim cannot be assessed. The stress-test note correctly flags that the central claim is empirical and the abstract alone does not contain internal contradictions, but it also does not contain the data needed to verify the outcomes.

This is for researchers working on runtime control of vision-language-action policies in robotics. If the full paper includes reproducible identification of the residuals, the controller details, and the actual metrics, it would be worth a serious referee to check whether the gains are real and general. Otherwise the contribution stays at the level of a plausible framework sketch.

I would send it to peer review so the experiments can be examined directly.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper proposes CTRL-STEER, a closed-loop framework for steering Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models at test time. It replaces fixed steering coefficients with adaptive control signals from PID or RL controllers, decoupling representation via motion-aligned residual directions from regulation. Experiments on four LIBERO task suites using a fine-tuned OpenVLA policy are reported to demonstrate more stable concept regulation and a superior steering-task success trade-off compared to fixed-coefficient baselines, without retraining the base model.

Significance. If the reported empirical improvements hold, this work could be significant for embodied AI applications by enabling more reliable test-time intervention in VLA models, particularly for temporal behaviors like speed and smoothness, addressing limitations of open-loop steering methods.

major comments (1)

[Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that CTRL-STEER 'achieves more stable concept regulation and a better steering-task success trade-off than fixed-coefficient baselines' on four LIBERO suites is presented without any quantitative results, metrics, error bars, or experimental details. This absence prevents verification of the empirical findings that form the core of the paper's contribution.

minor comments (1)

[Abstract] The description of the framework would benefit from a brief mention of how the motion-aligned residual directions are identified or computed.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their review and constructive comment on the abstract. We address the point below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: [Abstract] Abstract: The central claim that CTRL-STEER 'achieves more stable concept regulation and a better steering-task success trade-off than fixed-coefficient baselines' on four LIBERO suites is presented without any quantitative results, metrics, error bars, or experimental details. This absence prevents verification of the empirical findings that form the core of the paper's contribution.

Authors: We agree that the abstract would be strengthened by including key quantitative results. The full paper reports detailed experiments on four LIBERO suites with a fine-tuned OpenVLA policy, including task success rates, stability metrics, and comparisons to fixed-coefficient baselines. In the revised manuscript we will update the abstract to incorporate specific metrics (e.g., success rate improvements and regulation stability measures) with error bars to make the central claim verifiable at a glance. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; empirical framework with independent experimental validation

full rationale

The paper describes CTRL-STEER as a test-time closed-loop steering method using motion-aligned residuals and feedback controllers (PID or RL), evaluated empirically on four LIBERO suites with a fine-tuned OpenVLA policy. No equations, parameter-fitting procedures, or derivation steps are presented that would reduce the claimed performance gains to a self-definition, fitted-input prediction, or self-citation chain. The central claim rests on direct experimental comparisons of regulation stability and steering-success trade-offs against fixed-coefficient baselines, which are falsifiable by the reported protocol and do not rely on internal redefinitions or prior author results as load-bearing premises.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review yields no identifiable free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the method description does not introduce new fitted constants or unstated postulates beyond standard control theory.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5737 in / 1049 out tokens · 22267 ms · 2026-06-28T22:22:01.622442+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

37 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · 11 internal anchors

[1]

Analysis and design of feedback systems princeton, 2008

KJ ˚Astr¨om and RM Murray. Analysis and design of feedback systems princeton, 2008. 3

2008
[2]

Pid controllers: theory, design, and tuning

Karl J Astrom. Pid controllers: theory, design, and tuning. The international society of measurement and control, 1995. 2

1995
[3]

Princeton uni- versity press, 2021

Karl Johan ˚Astr¨om and Richard Murray.Feedback systems: an introduction for scientists and engineers. Princeton uni- versity press, 2021. 3

2021
[4]

A Careful Examination of Large Behavior Models for Multitask Dexterous Manipulation

Jose Barreiros, Andrew Beaulieu, Aditya Bhat, Rick Cory, Eric Cousineau, Hongkai Dai, Ching-Hsin Fang, Kunimatsu Hashimoto, Muhammad Zubair Irshad, Masha Itkina, et al. A careful examination of large behavior models for multitask dexterous manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.05331,

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv
[5]

Kevin Black, Noah Brown, Danny Driess, Adnan Esmail, Michael Equi, Chelsea Finn, Niccolo Fusai, Lachy Groom, Karol Hausman, Brian Ichter, et al.π 0: A vision-language- action flow model for general robot control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24164, 2024. 1, 2

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[6]

Towards monosemanticity: Decomposing language mod- els with dictionary learning.Transformer Circuits Thread,

Trenton Bricken, Adly Templeton, Joshua Batson, Brian Chen, Adam Jermyn, Tom Conerly, Nick Turner, Cem Anil, Carson Denison, Amanda Askell, Robert Lasenby, Yi- fan Wu, Shauna Kravec, Nicholas Schiefer, Tim Maxwell, Nicholas Joseph, Zac Hatfield-Dodds, Alex Tamkin, Ka- rina Nguyen, Brayden McLean, Josiah E Burke, Tristan Hume, Shan Carter, Tom Henighan, an...
[7]

https://transformer-circuits.pub/2023/monosemantic- features/index.html. 3

2023
[8]

Compose your policies! im- proving diffusion-based or flow-based robot policies via test-time distribution-level composition.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.01068, 2025

Jiahang Cao, Yize Huang, Hanzhong Guo, Rui Zhang, Mu Nan, Weijian Mai, Jiaxu Wang, Hao Cheng, Jingkai Sun, Gang Han, et al. Compose your policies! im- proving diffusion-based or flow-based robot policies via test-time distribution-level composition.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.01068, 2025. 1

work page arXiv 2025
[9]

Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action dif- fusion.The International Journal of Robotics Research, 44 (10-11):1684–1704, 2025

Cheng Chi, Zhenjia Xu, Siyuan Feng, Eric Cousineau, Yilun Du, Benjamin Burchfiel, Russ Tedrake, and Shuran Song. Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action dif- fusion.The International Journal of Robotics Research, 44 (10-11):1684–1704, 2025. 1

2025
[10]

Sparse autoencoders find highly interpretable features in language models.arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv–2309, 2023

Hoagy Cunningham, Aidan Ewart, Logan Riggs, Robert Huben, and Lee Sharkey. Sparse autoencoders find highly interpretable features in language models.arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv–2309, 2023. 2, 3, 4

2023
[11]

Transformer feed-forward layers are key-value memories

Mor Geva, Roei Schuster, Jonathan Berant, and Omer Levy. Transformer feed-forward layers are key-value memories. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 5484–5495, 2021. 1, 2, 3, 4

2021
[12]

Transformer feed-forward layers build predictions by pro- moting concepts in the vocabulary space

Mor Geva, Avi Caciularu, Kevin Wang, and Yoav Goldberg. Transformer feed-forward layers build predictions by pro- moting concepts in the vocabulary space. InProceedings of the 2022 conference on empirical methods in natural lan- guage processing, pages 30–45, 2022. 3

2022
[13]

Mechanistic interpretability for steering vision-language-action models

Bear H ¨aon, Kaylene Caswell Stocking, Ian Chuang, and Claire Tomlin. Mechanistic interpretability for steering vision-language-action models. InConference on Robot Learning, pages 2743–2762. PMLR, 2025. 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25

2025
[14]

Vima: Robot manipulation with multimodal prompts

Yunfan Jiang, Agrim Gupta, Zichen Zhang, Guanzhi Wang, Yongqiang Dou, Yanjun Chen, Li Fei-Fei, Anima Anandku- mar, Yuke Zhu, and Linxi Fan. Vima: Robot manipulation with multimodal prompts. 2023. 1

2023
[15]

Prismatic vlms: Investigating the design space of visually-conditioned language models

Siddharth Karamcheti, Suraj Nair, Ashwin Balakrishna, Percy Liang, Thomas Kollar, and Dorsa Sadigh. Prismatic vlms: Investigating the design space of visually-conditioned language models. InForty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024. 6

2024
[16]

Vision-language-action models for robotics: A review towards real-world applications.IEEE Access, 2025

Kento Kawaharazuka, Jihoon Oh, Jun Yamada, Ingmar Pos- ner, and Yuke Zhu. Vision-language-action models for robotics: A review towards real-world applications.IEEE Access, 2025. 1

2025
[17]

Controlling vision–language–action poli- cies through sparse latent directions

Momin Ahmad Khan, Novak Boskov, Fatima M Anwar, and Manzoor A Khan. Controlling vision–language–action poli- cies through sparse latent directions. InMechanistic Inter- pretability Workshop at NeurIPS 2025. 2

2025
[18]

DROID: A Large-Scale In-The-Wild Robot Manipulation Dataset

Alexander Khazatsky, Karl Pertsch, Suraj Nair, Ash- win Balakrishna, Sudeep Dasari, Siddharth Karamcheti, Soroush Nasiriany, Mohan Kumar Srirama, Lawrence Yun- liang Chen, Kirsty Ellis, et al. Droid: A large-scale in-the-wild robot manipulation dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.12945, 2024. 1

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[19]

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. 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 10

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[20]

A review of robot learning for manipulation: Challenges, rep- resentations, and algorithms.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 22(30):1–82, 2021

Oliver Kroemer, Scott Niekum, and George Konidaris. A review of robot learning for manipulation: Challenges, rep- resentations, and algorithms.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 22(30):1–82, 2021. 2

2021
[21]

Evaluating Real-World Robot Manipulation Policies in Simulation

Xuanlin Li, Kyle Hsu, Jiayuan Gu, Karl Pertsch, Oier Mees, Homer Rich Walke, Chuyuan Fu, Ishikaa Lunawat, Isabel Sieh, Sean Kirmani, et al. Evaluating real-world robot manipulation policies in simulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.05941, 2024. 7

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024
[22]

Libero: Benchmarking knowl- edge transfer for lifelong robot learning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:44776–44791, 2023

Bo Liu, Yifeng Zhu, Chongkai Gao, Yihao Feng, Qiang Liu, Yuke Zhu, and Peter Stone. Libero: Benchmarking knowl- edge transfer for lifelong robot learning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:44776–44791, 2023. 7

2023
[23]

Locating and editing factual associations in gpt.Ad- vances in neural information processing systems, 35:17359– 17372, 2022

Kevin Meng, David Bau, Alex Andonian, and Yonatan Be- linkov. Locating and editing factual associations in gpt.Ad- vances in neural information processing systems, 35:17359– 17372, 2022. 3

2022
[24]

Feature visualization.Distill, 2(11):e7, 2017

Chris Olah, Alexander Mordvintsev, and Ludwig Schubert. Feature visualization.Distill, 2(11):e7, 2017. 2

2017
[25]

Towards scalable robot learning without physical robots

Younghyo Park. Towards scalable robot learning without physical robots. Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2025. 1

2025
[26]

A Generalist Agent

Scott Reed, Konrad Zolna, Emilio Parisotto, Sergio Gomez Colmenarejo, Alexander Novikov, Gabriel Barth-Maron, Mai Gimenez, Yury Sulsky, Jackie Kay, Jost Tobias Sprin- genberg, et al. A generalist agent.arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.06175, 2022. 1

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022
[27]

Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms

John Schulman, Filip Wolski, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alec Rad- ford, and Oleg Klimov. Proximal policy optimization algo- rithms.arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347, 2017. 2

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017
[28]

Gigabrain-0: A world model-powered vision-language-action model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.19430, 2025

GigaBrain Team, Angen Ye, Boyuan Wang, Chaojun Ni, Guan Huang, Guosheng Zhao, Haoyun Li, Jie Li, Jia- gang Zhu, Lv Feng, et al. Gigabrain-0: A world model- powered vision-language-action model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.19430, 2025. 1

work page arXiv 2025
[29]

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. 2, 6

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023
[30]

Steering Your Diffusion Policy with Latent Space Reinforcement Learning

Andrew Wagenmaker, Mitsuhiko Nakamoto, Yunchu Zhang, Seohong Park, Waleed Yagoub, Anusha Nagabandi, Ab- hishek Gupta, and Sergey Levine. Steering your diffu- sion policy with latent space reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.15799, 2025. 1

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[31]

Bridgedata v2: A dataset for robot learning at scale

Homer Rich Walke, Kevin Black, Tony Z Zhao, Quan Vuong, Chongyi Zheng, Philippe Hansen-Estruch, An- dre Wang He, Vivek Myers, Moo Jin Kim, Max Du, et al. Bridgedata v2: A dataset for robot learning at scale. InCon- ference on Robot Learning, pages 1723–1736. PMLR, 2023. 1, 7

2023
[32]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.13630 , year=

Xiu Yuan, Tongzhou Mu, Stone Tao, Yunhao Fang, Mengke Zhang, and Hao Su. Policy decorator: Model-agnostic online refinement for large policy model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.13630, 2024. 1

work page arXiv 2024
[33]

Up-vla: A unified understanding and prediction model for embodied agent

Jianke Zhang, Yanjiang Guo, Yucheng Hu, Xiaoyu Chen, Xi- ang Zhu, and Jianyu Chen. Up-vla: A unified understanding and prediction model for embodied agent. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2025. 1

2025
[34]

X-VLA: Soft-Prompted Transformer as Scalable Cross-Embodiment Vision-Language-Action Model

Jinliang Zheng, Jianxiong Li, Zhihao Wang, Dongxiu Liu, Xirui Kang, Yuchun Feng, Yinan Zheng, Jiayin Zou, Yilun Chen, Jia Zeng, et al. X-vla: Soft-prompted transformer as scalable cross-embodiment vision-language-action model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.10274, 2025. 7, 8

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025
[35]

Unified latent steering and residual refine- ment for online improvement of diffusion policy models

Zhengbang Zhu, Ziyan Li, Xiu Yuan, Hanbo Zhang, Yux- iao Liu, Chongjie Zhang, Yong Yu, Weinan Zhang, and Minghuan Liu. Unified latent steering and residual refine- ment for online improvement of diffusion policy models
[36]

Rt-2: Vision-language-action models transfer web knowledge to robotic control

Brianna Zitkovich, Tianhe Yu, Sichun Xu, Peng Xu, Ted Xiao, Fei Xia, Jialin Wu, Paul Wohlhart, Stefan Welker, Ayzaan Wahid, et al. Rt-2: Vision-language-action models transfer web knowledge to robotic control. InConference on Robot Learning, pages 2165–2183. PMLR, 2023. 1, 2

2023
[37]

Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparency

Andy Zou, Long Phan, Sarah Chen, James Campbell, Phillip Guo, Richard Ren, Alexander Pan, Xuwang Yin, Mantas Mazeika, Ann-Kathrin Dombrowski, et al. Representation engineering: A top-down approach to ai transparency.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01405, 2023. 3 11 A. RL Training without PID Initialization In this section, we provide detailed results across all...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

[1] [1]

Analysis and design of feedback systems princeton, 2008

KJ ˚Astr¨om and RM Murray. Analysis and design of feedback systems princeton, 2008. 3

2008

[2] [2]

Pid controllers: theory, design, and tuning

Karl J Astrom. Pid controllers: theory, design, and tuning. The international society of measurement and control, 1995. 2

1995

[3] [3]

Princeton uni- versity press, 2021

Karl Johan ˚Astr¨om and Richard Murray.Feedback systems: an introduction for scientists and engineers. Princeton uni- versity press, 2021. 3

2021

[4] [4]

A Careful Examination of Large Behavior Models for Multitask Dexterous Manipulation

Jose Barreiros, Andrew Beaulieu, Aditya Bhat, Rick Cory, Eric Cousineau, Hongkai Dai, Ching-Hsin Fang, Kunimatsu Hashimoto, Muhammad Zubair Irshad, Masha Itkina, et al. A careful examination of large behavior models for multitask dexterous manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2507.05331,

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv

[5] [5]

Kevin Black, Noah Brown, Danny Driess, Adnan Esmail, Michael Equi, Chelsea Finn, Niccolo Fusai, Lachy Groom, Karol Hausman, Brian Ichter, et al.π 0: A vision-language- action flow model for general robot control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24164, 2024. 1, 2

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

[6] [6]

Towards monosemanticity: Decomposing language mod- els with dictionary learning.Transformer Circuits Thread,

Trenton Bricken, Adly Templeton, Joshua Batson, Brian Chen, Adam Jermyn, Tom Conerly, Nick Turner, Cem Anil, Carson Denison, Amanda Askell, Robert Lasenby, Yi- fan Wu, Shauna Kravec, Nicholas Schiefer, Tim Maxwell, Nicholas Joseph, Zac Hatfield-Dodds, Alex Tamkin, Ka- rina Nguyen, Brayden McLean, Josiah E Burke, Tristan Hume, Shan Carter, Tom Henighan, an...

[7] [7]

https://transformer-circuits.pub/2023/monosemantic- features/index.html. 3

2023

[8] [8]

Compose your policies! im- proving diffusion-based or flow-based robot policies via test-time distribution-level composition.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.01068, 2025

Jiahang Cao, Yize Huang, Hanzhong Guo, Rui Zhang, Mu Nan, Weijian Mai, Jiaxu Wang, Hao Cheng, Jingkai Sun, Gang Han, et al. Compose your policies! im- proving diffusion-based or flow-based robot policies via test-time distribution-level composition.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.01068, 2025. 1

work page arXiv 2025

[9] [9]

Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action dif- fusion.The International Journal of Robotics Research, 44 (10-11):1684–1704, 2025

Cheng Chi, Zhenjia Xu, Siyuan Feng, Eric Cousineau, Yilun Du, Benjamin Burchfiel, Russ Tedrake, and Shuran Song. Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action dif- fusion.The International Journal of Robotics Research, 44 (10-11):1684–1704, 2025. 1

2025

[10] [10]

Sparse autoencoders find highly interpretable features in language models.arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv–2309, 2023

Hoagy Cunningham, Aidan Ewart, Logan Riggs, Robert Huben, and Lee Sharkey. Sparse autoencoders find highly interpretable features in language models.arXiv e-prints, pages arXiv–2309, 2023. 2, 3, 4

2023

[11] [11]

Transformer feed-forward layers are key-value memories

Mor Geva, Roei Schuster, Jonathan Berant, and Omer Levy. Transformer feed-forward layers are key-value memories. In Proceedings of the 2021 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing, pages 5484–5495, 2021. 1, 2, 3, 4

2021

[12] [12]

Transformer feed-forward layers build predictions by pro- moting concepts in the vocabulary space

Mor Geva, Avi Caciularu, Kevin Wang, and Yoav Goldberg. Transformer feed-forward layers build predictions by pro- moting concepts in the vocabulary space. InProceedings of the 2022 conference on empirical methods in natural lan- guage processing, pages 30–45, 2022. 3

2022

[13] [13]

Mechanistic interpretability for steering vision-language-action models

Bear H ¨aon, Kaylene Caswell Stocking, Ian Chuang, and Claire Tomlin. Mechanistic interpretability for steering vision-language-action models. InConference on Robot Learning, pages 2743–2762. PMLR, 2025. 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25

2025

[14] [14]

Vima: Robot manipulation with multimodal prompts

Yunfan Jiang, Agrim Gupta, Zichen Zhang, Guanzhi Wang, Yongqiang Dou, Yanjun Chen, Li Fei-Fei, Anima Anandku- mar, Yuke Zhu, and Linxi Fan. Vima: Robot manipulation with multimodal prompts. 2023. 1

2023

[15] [15]

Prismatic vlms: Investigating the design space of visually-conditioned language models

Siddharth Karamcheti, Suraj Nair, Ashwin Balakrishna, Percy Liang, Thomas Kollar, and Dorsa Sadigh. Prismatic vlms: Investigating the design space of visually-conditioned language models. InForty-first International Conference on Machine Learning, 2024. 6

2024

[16] [16]

Vision-language-action models for robotics: A review towards real-world applications.IEEE Access, 2025

Kento Kawaharazuka, Jihoon Oh, Jun Yamada, Ingmar Pos- ner, and Yuke Zhu. Vision-language-action models for robotics: A review towards real-world applications.IEEE Access, 2025. 1

2025

[17] [17]

Controlling vision–language–action poli- cies through sparse latent directions

Momin Ahmad Khan, Novak Boskov, Fatima M Anwar, and Manzoor A Khan. Controlling vision–language–action poli- cies through sparse latent directions. InMechanistic Inter- pretability Workshop at NeurIPS 2025. 2

2025

[18] [18]

DROID: A Large-Scale In-The-Wild Robot Manipulation Dataset

Alexander Khazatsky, Karl Pertsch, Suraj Nair, Ash- win Balakrishna, Sudeep Dasari, Siddharth Karamcheti, Soroush Nasiriany, Mohan Kumar Srirama, Lawrence Yun- liang Chen, Kirsty Ellis, et al. Droid: A large-scale in-the-wild robot manipulation dataset.arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.12945, 2024. 1

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

[19] [19]

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. 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 9, 12, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 10

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

[20] [20]

A review of robot learning for manipulation: Challenges, rep- resentations, and algorithms.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 22(30):1–82, 2021

Oliver Kroemer, Scott Niekum, and George Konidaris. A review of robot learning for manipulation: Challenges, rep- resentations, and algorithms.Journal of Machine Learning Research, 22(30):1–82, 2021. 2

2021

[21] [21]

Evaluating Real-World Robot Manipulation Policies in Simulation

Xuanlin Li, Kyle Hsu, Jiayuan Gu, Karl Pertsch, Oier Mees, Homer Rich Walke, Chuyuan Fu, Ishikaa Lunawat, Isabel Sieh, Sean Kirmani, et al. Evaluating real-world robot manipulation policies in simulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.05941, 2024. 7

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

[22] [22]

Libero: Benchmarking knowl- edge transfer for lifelong robot learning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:44776–44791, 2023

Bo Liu, Yifeng Zhu, Chongkai Gao, Yihao Feng, Qiang Liu, Yuke Zhu, and Peter Stone. Libero: Benchmarking knowl- edge transfer for lifelong robot learning.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 36:44776–44791, 2023. 7

2023

[23] [23]

Locating and editing factual associations in gpt.Ad- vances in neural information processing systems, 35:17359– 17372, 2022

Kevin Meng, David Bau, Alex Andonian, and Yonatan Be- linkov. Locating and editing factual associations in gpt.Ad- vances in neural information processing systems, 35:17359– 17372, 2022. 3

2022

[24] [24]

Feature visualization.Distill, 2(11):e7, 2017

Chris Olah, Alexander Mordvintsev, and Ludwig Schubert. Feature visualization.Distill, 2(11):e7, 2017. 2

2017

[25] [25]

Towards scalable robot learning without physical robots

Younghyo Park. Towards scalable robot learning without physical robots. Master’s thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2025. 1

2025

[26] [26]

A Generalist Agent

Scott Reed, Konrad Zolna, Emilio Parisotto, Sergio Gomez Colmenarejo, Alexander Novikov, Gabriel Barth-Maron, Mai Gimenez, Yury Sulsky, Jackie Kay, Jost Tobias Sprin- genberg, et al. A generalist agent.arXiv preprint arXiv:2205.06175, 2022. 1

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

[27] [27]

Proximal Policy Optimization Algorithms

John Schulman, Filip Wolski, Prafulla Dhariwal, Alec Rad- ford, and Oleg Klimov. Proximal policy optimization algo- rithms.arXiv preprint arXiv:1707.06347, 2017. 2

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

[28] [28]

Gigabrain-0: A world model-powered vision-language-action model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.19430, 2025

GigaBrain Team, Angen Ye, Boyuan Wang, Chaojun Ni, Guan Huang, Guosheng Zhao, Haoyun Li, Jie Li, Jia- gang Zhu, Lv Feng, et al. Gigabrain-0: A world model- powered vision-language-action model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.19430, 2025. 1

work page arXiv 2025

[29] [29]

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. 2, 6

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

[30] [30]

Steering Your Diffusion Policy with Latent Space Reinforcement Learning

Andrew Wagenmaker, Mitsuhiko Nakamoto, Yunchu Zhang, Seohong Park, Waleed Yagoub, Anusha Nagabandi, Ab- hishek Gupta, and Sergey Levine. Steering your diffu- sion policy with latent space reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.15799, 2025. 1

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[31] [31]

Bridgedata v2: A dataset for robot learning at scale

Homer Rich Walke, Kevin Black, Tony Z Zhao, Quan Vuong, Chongyi Zheng, Philippe Hansen-Estruch, An- dre Wang He, Vivek Myers, Moo Jin Kim, Max Du, et al. Bridgedata v2: A dataset for robot learning at scale. InCon- ference on Robot Learning, pages 1723–1736. PMLR, 2023. 1, 7

2023

[32] [32]

arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.13630 , year=

Xiu Yuan, Tongzhou Mu, Stone Tao, Yunhao Fang, Mengke Zhang, and Hao Su. Policy decorator: Model-agnostic online refinement for large policy model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.13630, 2024. 1

work page arXiv 2024

[33] [33]

Up-vla: A unified understanding and prediction model for embodied agent

Jianke Zhang, Yanjiang Guo, Yucheng Hu, Xiaoyu Chen, Xi- ang Zhu, and Jianyu Chen. Up-vla: A unified understanding and prediction model for embodied agent. InInternational Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), 2025. 1

2025

[34] [34]

X-VLA: Soft-Prompted Transformer as Scalable Cross-Embodiment Vision-Language-Action Model

Jinliang Zheng, Jianxiong Li, Zhihao Wang, Dongxiu Liu, Xirui Kang, Yuchun Feng, Yinan Zheng, Jiayin Zou, Yilun Chen, Jia Zeng, et al. X-vla: Soft-prompted transformer as scalable cross-embodiment vision-language-action model. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.10274, 2025. 7, 8

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

[35] [35]

Unified latent steering and residual refine- ment for online improvement of diffusion policy models

Zhengbang Zhu, Ziyan Li, Xiu Yuan, Hanbo Zhang, Yux- iao Liu, Chongjie Zhang, Yong Yu, Weinan Zhang, and Minghuan Liu. Unified latent steering and residual refine- ment for online improvement of diffusion policy models

[36] [36]

Rt-2: Vision-language-action models transfer web knowledge to robotic control

Brianna Zitkovich, Tianhe Yu, Sichun Xu, Peng Xu, Ted Xiao, Fei Xia, Jialin Wu, Paul Wohlhart, Stefan Welker, Ayzaan Wahid, et al. Rt-2: Vision-language-action models transfer web knowledge to robotic control. InConference on Robot Learning, pages 2165–2183. PMLR, 2023. 1, 2

2023

[37] [37]

Representation Engineering: A Top-Down Approach to AI Transparency

Andy Zou, Long Phan, Sarah Chen, James Campbell, Phillip Guo, Richard Ren, Alexander Pan, Xuwang Yin, Mantas Mazeika, Ann-Kathrin Dombrowski, et al. Representation engineering: A top-down approach to ai transparency.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.01405, 2023. 3 11 A. RL Training without PID Initialization In this section, we provide detailed results across all...

work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023