Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 46 references

Action meaning for robots depends on what the action does to the scene, not just the motor command.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-14 05:39 UTC pith:TX2CVZJ2

load-bearing objection Clean dual-objective action latent that actually helps long-horizon VLA policies; the DINOv3-effect proxy is the soft underbelly, not a collapse of the claim. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.11427 v1 pith:TX2CVZJ2 submitted 2026-07-13 cs.RO

EDAR: Learning Environment-Dependent Action Representations for Robotic Manipulation

Yuecheng Xu , Tong Yang , Jingkai Jia , Chi Zhang , Xuelong Li , Wenqiang Zhang This is my paper
classification cs.RO
keywords robotic manipulationaction representation learningenvironment-dependent latentsvision-language-action modelsvisual consequence predictionlong-horizon controllatent action tokens
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Raw robot control trajectories are noisy and hard for policies to learn from, so researchers compress them into action tokens. Most existing methods only compress the shape of the motor sequence itself, treating what the action does in the world as an afterthought. This paper argues that is the wrong starting point for manipulation: the same gripper motion can do nothing, grasp an object, or close a drawer depending on the scene, so action meaning is environment-dependent. EDAR learns continuous latent action tokens that must both reconstruct the original motor commands and predict how the scene will look after the action, using current visual context while the tokens are formed. Across standard simulation benchmarks and long-horizon real-robot tasks, policies that predict these tokens outperform matched trajectory-only interfaces, with the largest gains when success requires surviving a chain of scene-changing steps.

Core claim

An action representation for robotic manipulation is more effective when its latent tokens are forced to encode both executable control structure and the environment-conditioned visual consequence of the action, rather than only the geometry or statistics of the command trajectory. Under matched training settings this environment-dependent interface raises downstream policy success, especially on long-horizon tasks.

What carries the argument

EDAR (Environment-Dependent Action Representation): continuous latent action tokens formed by shared attention among the action chunk, current multi-view visual tokens, and learnable register tokens, then trained with dual objectives of action reconstruction and future visual-feature prediction through a shared-attention decoder with specialized action and visual feed-forward branches.

Load-bearing premise

The claim rests on the idea that frozen pretrained visual features of the future observation are a good enough fixed target for “what the action did to the world,” so that matching them organizes the action latents around interaction meaning instead of leftover trajectory patterns or surface appearance.

What would settle it

Train the identical architecture and policy pipeline with the future-visual loss removed or replaced by a deliberately uninformative target; if long-horizon success rates then match or exceed full EDAR on the same LIBERO-Long and real-robot tasks, the environment-dependence claim fails.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper argues that action representations for robotic manipulation should be environment-dependent rather than trajectory-structure-only, because the same motor segment can induce different scene effects under different contexts. It proposes EDAR: continuous latent action tokens formed by shared attention over action chunks, current multi-view visual tokens, and register tokens, then trained with dual targets—action reconstruction (Eq. 5) and cosine-distance prediction of frozen future visual features (Eqs. 2, 6; primarily DINOv3). A shared-attention decoder with specialized FFN branches handles the heterogeneous targets. Downstream, policies (flow-matching / VLA-style) predict EDAR latents that are decoded to controls. Controlled matched-backbone experiments on LIBERO (SmolVLA, π0), CALVIN (SmolVLA, FLOWER), Meta-World (SmolVLA), plus four real-robot long-horizon tasks and ablations (Table 4, Fig. 5), report higher success especially on long-horizon suites.

Significance. If the empirical findings hold under proper uncertainty reporting, EDAR is a solid and useful contribution to action-interface design for visuomotor and VLA policies. Strengths include: (i) a clear problem formulation with a matched-backbone protocol that isolates the action interface; (ii) consistent gains that concentrate where the hypothesis predicts (LIBERO-Long, CALVIN chain length, hard Meta-World groups, real long-horizon scores); (iii) targeted ablations of encoder context, future-prediction loss, and dual-target decoder design; and (iv) real-robot validation under a fixed training budget. The work is incremental relative to latent-action and world-model lines, but the framing—using predicted visual consequences to organize the action space rather than to plan—is coherent and transferable. Credit is due for the controlled SmolVLA/π0/FLOWER comparisons and the VAE ablation that partially separates latent compression from environment dependence.

major comments (3)
  1. Tables 1–3 and the real-world bar plots report only point estimates (e.g., LIBERO-Long 71.0%→80.6%, Meta-World Hard 55.0%→78.3%, real average 45→69). For a load-bearing claim that environment-dependent latents improve long-horizon policy learning under matched settings, multi-seed means and standard deviations (or at least evaluation variance over fixed seeds) are needed. Without them, the magnitude of the headline gains cannot be assessed against run-to-run noise typical of imitation/VLA training.
  2. §3.2 Eqs. (2),(6) and the stop-gradient cosine loss make frozen future DINOv3 features the proxy for “environment-conditioned effects.” Table 4b shows removing L_eff drops Avg. only 91.8→90.1, while SmolVLA-VAE (no env./effect) already reaches 89.1 vs SmolVLA 87.3. Fig. 5 further shows target-space sensitivity. These results support a useful auxiliary signal but do not rule out residual trajectory–feature correlation organizing Z_t. The manuscript should either (a) add a control that severs motor–DINOv3 correlation while preserving true scene change, or (b) temper claims of “interaction semantics” to what the ablations actually isolate: a latent interface plus a helpful future-feature regularizer.
  3. §4.1.1–4.1.2 integrate EDAR into stronger backbones (π0, FLOWER) with large Long/chain gains, but representation pretraining recipes (Table E: λ, K, H, steps) differ across LIBERO/CALVIN/Meta-World/real and OpenX pretraining is used only for real-world variants. Please state explicitly which EDAR checkpoint is frozen into each policy, whether any hyperparameter was re-tuned for EDAR vs baseline, and whether OpenX pretraining is applied to simulation baselines. Without this, “matched training settings” is only partially verifiable for the strongest reported systems.
minor comments (5)
  1. Fig. 1 and Fig. 2 are conceptually clear; ensure vector fonts and consistent token notation (Z_t vs a_t) match Eqs. (3)–(4) in the camera-ready version.
  2. Related Work §2: briefly clarify distinction from concurrent latent-action / JEPA-VLA lines (e.g., ACT-JEPA, VLA-JEPA) beyond the high-level “future used to organize actions” sentence, to help readers place the contribution.
  3. Supplementary Fig. B t-SNE distances are diagnostic only; state that L2 in raw latent space is not a calibrated semantic metric, to avoid over-reading the separation numbers.
  4. Typos/consistency: “feauture space” in Supp. A.1; “environment-independe” in Fig. B caption; unify VAE vs V AE spelling across main text and figures.
  5. Report the exact value of λ used in each main-table run (Table E lists 0.1–0.2) in the main experimental section for reproducibility.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: dual reconstruction/prediction defines the latent, but success is measured on external held-out task metrics.

full rationale

EDAR defines continuous latent tokens Z_t by joint action reconstruction (Eq. 5) and cosine-distance prediction of frozen DINOv3 future features (Eqs. 2, 6) under a shared-attention encoder/decoder. That definition is intentional architecture, not a claim that the dual objective equals task success by construction. Downstream evaluation freezes the representation and trains a separate flow-matching policy; reported numbers are success rates / completed sequence lengths / normalized sub-step scores on held-out LIBERO, CALVIN, Meta-World, and real-robot episodes. Ablations (VAE without environment/effect, remove L_eff, remove encoder context, alternative visual targets) further isolate components without reducing the metric to a fitted constant. No uniqueness theorem, self-citation chain, or fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. Residual trajectory leakage is a correctness/causal-attribution concern, not circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 4 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard Transformer machinery, the domain premise that action meaning is scene-dependent, the modeling choice that frozen DINOv3 features are adequate effect targets, and a handful of free hyper-parameters (λ, K, chunk size). No new physical entities are postulated; the invented object is the latent action token itself, whose value is judged by external policy success.

free parameters (4)
  • λ (visual-consequence loss weight) = 0.1–0.2
    Balances action reconstruction against future-feature cosine loss; set to 0.1–0.2 by recipe (Table E).
  • K (number of latent action tokens) = 4
    Fixed-size interface for variable-length chunks; set to 4.
  • chunk horizon H / action horizon = 16/8 or 20
    Training and execution horizons (16/8 or 20) chosen per benchmark.
  • learning-rate schedule and training steps = per Table E / §A.2
    Cosine schedules (e.g., 1.5e-4→5e-6, 100k steps) fixed by recipe; affect final numbers.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Action semantics in manipulation are inherently environment-dependent: identical motor segments can induce different scene transitions.
    Stated in abstract and §1; motivates the entire design and is illustrated by Fig. 1.
  • domain assumption Frozen pretrained visual features (DINOv3) of future observations supply a fixed, task-relevant target for environment-conditioned effects.
    §3.2 Eqs. 2 and 6; stop-gradient cosine loss; validated only by the Fig. 5 ablation.
  • ad hoc to paper Shared self-attention plus token-specialized FFNs can couple heterogeneous action and visual targets without destructive interference.
    Decoder design in §3.3; justified by the three-way ablation in Table 4c.
  • standard math Standard Transformer encoder/decoder with RMSNorm and register tokens is a sufficient architecture for the dual objective.
    Architecture details in §A.1; no novel theoretical claim.
invented entities (1)
  • EDAR continuous latent action tokens Z_t no independent evidence
    purpose: Compact, environment-dependent policy interface that is both executable and effect-aware.
    Defined by the encoder output of register tokens under the dual loss; evaluated only via downstream task success, not by an independent physical measurement.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 23495 in / 2795 out tokens · 38146 ms · 2026-07-14T05:39:43.538743+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Learning effective action representations is critical for robotic manipulation, where raw control trajectories are often noisy, redundant, and difficult to model directly. Existing methods mainly encode the structure of the action stream itself, treating the role of actions in the environment as implicit. Yet manipulation is about changing the world: the same action segment can induce different outcomes under different scene contexts, making action semantics inherently environment-dependent. We propose EDAR, an Environment-Dependent Action Representation that grounds action tokens in both executable control structure and expected visual consequences. By coupling motor commands with their environment-conditioned effects, EDAR encourages the learned action space to capture interaction semantics rather than merely command-level patterns. Experiments on simulated and real-robot manipulation benchmarks demonstrate that EDAR improves downstream policy learning, especially in long-horizon manipulation. These results highlight the importance of grounding action representations in executable control structure and environment-conditioned visual change.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.11427 by Chi Zhang, Jingkai Jia, Tong Yang, Wenqiang Zhang, Xuelong Li, Yuecheng Xu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Conceptual comparison. The same action segment can induce different effects under different scene contexts, and should therefore not be represented as a context-invariant representation. Left: trajectory-only action representation collapses these environment￾dependent effects into the same latent action. Right: EDAR conditions the action representation on the current scene and grounds it with visual conseq… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Overview of Environment-Dependent Action Representation (EDAR). EDAR encodes the action chunk At, current visual tokens Xt, and learnable register tokens R into continuous latent action tokens Zt. The decoder reconstructs the original action chunk Aˆt while predicting future visual tokens Xˆt+H, forcing the latent action representation to capture both executable control structure and environment-conditione… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Real-world long-horizon manipulation results. We report normalized average score on four real-world tasks: Stack-5, Drawer, Rope, and Flower, together with the average score across tasks. Task Progress (a) Stack-5: stack blocks in yellow-green-orange-blue-red order. (b) Drawer: open the top drawer, put the tissue into the top drawer and close it; open the middle drawer, take the sponge out and close the dr… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Qualitative results of long-horizon real-world tasks. Key frames for the four long-horizon tasks. Each subfigure shows the progression from start to completion. As the baseline, SmolVLA is trained independently on each task. For the latent-action variants, we com￾pare SmolVLA-VAE, an environment-independent VAE￾style action representation, and SmolVLA-EDAR, which uses action reconstruction and visual conse… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Ablation of visual feature spaces for future conse￾quence prediction. All variants use the same EDAR architecture and differ only in the visual encoder used to produce future feature targets. We report the average success rate on LIBERO. variants. This may be because EDAR relies on endpoint dense-feature prediction, where the target space should pro￾vide spatially stable local supervision for action-induce… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

46 extracted references · 29 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Self-supervised learning from images with a joint-embedding predictive architecture

    Mahmoud Assran, Quentin Duval, Ishan Misra, Piotr Bo- janowski, Pascal Vincent, Michael Rabbat, Yann LeCun, and Nicolas Ballas. Self-supervised learning from images with a joint-embedding predictive architecture. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, 2023. 3

    2023

  2. [2]

    V-JEPA 2: Self- supervised video models enable understanding, prediction and planning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.09985, 2025

    Mido Assran, Adrien Bardes, David Fan, Quentin Garrido, Russell Howes, Mojtaba Komeili, et al. V-JEPA 2: Self- supervised video models enable understanding, prediction and planning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.09985, 2025. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  3. [3]

    pi0: A vision-language-action flow model for general robot control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24164, 2024

    Kevin Black, Noah Brown, Danny Driess, Adnan Esmail, Michael Equi, Chelsea Finn, et al. pi0: A vision-language-action flow model for general robot control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24164, 2024. 2, 5, 6, 7

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    RT-1: Robotics transformer for real-world control at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.06817, 2022

    Anthony Brohan, Noah Brown, Justice Carbajal, Yevgen Chebotar, Joseph Dabis, Chelsea Finn, et al. RT-1: Robotics transformer for real-world control at scale.arXiv preprint arXiv:2212.06817, 2022. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    RT-2: Vision-language-action models transfer web knowledge to robotic control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.15818, 2023

    Anthony Brohan, Noah Brown, Justice Carbajal, Yevgen Chebotar, Xi Chen, Krzysztof Choromanski, et al. RT-2: Vision-language-action models transfer web knowledge to robotic control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.15818, 2023. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Worldvla: Towards autoregressive action world model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.21539, 2025

    Jun Cen, Chaohui Yu, Hangjie Yuan, Yuming Jiang, Siteng Huang, et al. Worldvla: Towards autoregressive action world model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.21539, 2025. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action dif- fusion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.04137, 2023

    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.arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.04137, 2023. 6, 7

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Gemini robotics: Bringing ai into the physical world.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20020, 2025

    Gemini Robotics Team. Gemini robotics: Bringing ai into the physical world.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.20020, 2025. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  9. [9]

    Carp: Visuomotor policy learning via coarse-to-fine autore- gressive prediction

    Zhefei Gong, Pengxiang Ding, Shangke Lyu, Siteng Huang, Mingyang Sun, Wei Zhao, Zhaoxin Fan, and Donglin Wang. Carp: Visuomotor policy learning via coarse-to-fine autore- gressive prediction. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF In- ternational Conference on Computer Vision, pages 13460– 13470, 2025. 3

    2025

  10. [10]

    Mimic intent, not just trajec- tories.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.08602, 2026

    Renming Huang, Chendong Zeng, Wenjing Tang, Jingtian Cai, Cewu Lu, and Panpan Cai. Mimic intent, not just trajec- tories.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.08602, 2026. 3, 7

    arXiv 2026

  11. [11]

    Openvla: An open-source vision- language-action model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09246,

    Moo Jin Kim, Karl Pertsch, Siddharth Karamcheti, Ted Xiao, Ashwin Balakrishna, et al. Openvla: An open-source vision- language-action model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09246,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  12. [12]

    Cosmos policy: Fine-tuning video models for visuomotor control and planning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.16163, 2026

    Moo Jin Kim, Yihuai Gao, Tsung-Yi Lin, Yen-Chen Lin, Yunhao Ge, Grace Lam, et al. Cosmos policy: Fine-tuning video models for visuomotor control and planning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.16163, 2026. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  13. [13]

    CogACT: A foundational vision- language-action model for synergizing cognition and action in robotic manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.19650,

    Qixiu Li, Yaobo Liang, Zeyu Wang, Lin Luo, Xi Chen, Mozheng Liao, et al. CogACT: A foundational vision- language-action model for synergizing cognition and action in robotic manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.19650,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  14. [14]

    Unified video action model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.00200, 2025

    Shuang Li, Yihuai Gao, Dorsa Sadigh, and Shuran Song. Unified video action model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.00200, 2025. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  15. [15]

    Vision-language foun- dation models as effective robot imitators.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.01378, 2023

    Xinghang Li, Minghuan Liu, Hanbo Zhang, Cunjun Yu, Jie Xu, Hongtao Wu, Chilam Cheang, Ya Jing, Weinan Zhang, Huaping Liu, Hang Li, and Tao Kong. Vision-language foun- dation models as effective robot imitators.arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.01378, 2023. 7

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  16. [16]

    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. 2, 5

    2023

  17. [17]

    OAT: Ordered action tokenization

    Chaoqi Liu, Xiaoshen Han, Jiawei Gao, Yue Zhao, Haonan Chen, and Yilun Du. OAT: Ordered action tokenization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.04215, 2026. 3

    arXiv 2026

  18. [18]

    RoboMamba: Efficient vision- language-action model for robotic reasoning and manipula- tion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.04339, 2024

    Jiaming Liu, Mengzhen Liu, Zhenyu Wang, Pengju An, Xi- aoqi Li, Kaichen Zhou, et al. RoboMamba: Efficient vision- language-action model for robotic reasoning and manipula- tion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.04339, 2024. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  19. [19]

    OmniSAT: Compact action token, faster auto regression

    Huaihai Lyu, Chaofan Chen, Senwei Xie, Pengwei Wang, Xiansheng Chen, Shanghang Zhang, and Changsheng Xu. OmniSAT: Compact action token, faster auto regression. arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.09667, 2025. 3, 6

    arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    LeWorldModel: Stable end- to-end joint-embedding predictive architecture from pixels

    Lucas Maes, Quentin Le Lidec, Damien Scieur, Yann Le- Cun, and Randall Balestriero. LeWorldModel: Stable end- to-end joint-embedding predictive architecture from pixels. arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.19312, 2026. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  21. [21]

    CALVIN: A benchmark for language- conditioned policy learning for long-horizon robot manip- ulation tasks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.03227, 2021

    Oier Mees, Lukas Hermann, Erick Rosete-Beas, and Wol- fram Burgard. CALVIN: A benchmark for language- conditioned policy learning for long-horizon robot manip- ulation tasks.arXiv preprint arXiv:2112.03227, 2021. 2, 5, 6, 12

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  22. [22]

    Quest: Self-supervised skill abstractions for learning continuous control.Advances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, 37:4062–4089, 2024

    Atharva Mete, Haotian Xue, Albert Wilcox, Yongxin Chen, and Animesh Garg. Quest: Self-supervised skill abstractions for learning continuous control.Advances in Neural Infor- mation Processing Systems, 37:4062–4089, 2024. 3

    2024

  23. [23]

    Open x-embodiment: Robotic learning datasets and rt-x models: Open x-embodiment collaboration 0

    Abby O’Neill, Abdul Rehman, Abhiram Maddukuri, Ab- hishek Gupta, Abhishek Padalkar, Abraham Lee, Acorn Poo- ley, Agrim Gupta, Ajay Mandlekar, Ajinkya Jain, et al. Open x-embodiment: Robotic learning datasets and rt-x models: Open x-embodiment collaboration 0. In2024 IEEE Inter- national Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 6892–6903. IEEE, ...

    2024

  24. [24]

    Fast: Efficient action tokeniza- tion for vision-language-action models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.09747, 2025

    Karl Pertsch, Kyle Stachowicz, Brian Ichter, Danny Driess, Suraj Nair, et al. Fast: Efficient action tokeniza- tion for vision-language-action models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.09747, 2025. 1, 3, 6

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Physical Intelligence, Kevin Black, Noah Brown, James Darpinian, Karan Dhabalia, Danny Driess, et al.π 0.5: A vision-language-action model with open-world generaliza- tion.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.16054, 2025. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    Efficient diffusion transformer policies with mixture of expert denoisers for multitask learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.12953, 2024

    Moritz Reuss, Jyothish Pari, Pulkit Agrawal, and Rudolf Li- outikov. Efficient diffusion transformer policies with mixture of expert denoisers for multitask learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.12953, 2024. 7

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

    Multimodal diffusion transformer: Learn- ing versatile behavior from multimodal goals

    Moritz Reuss, ¨Omer Erdinc ¸ Ya˘gmurlu, Fabian Wenzel, and Rudolf Lioutikov. Multimodal diffusion transformer: Learn- ing versatile behavior from multimodal goals. InRobotics: Science and Systems, 2024. 7

    2024

  28. [28]

    FLOWER: Democratizing generalist robot policies with efficient vision-language-action flow policies.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.04996, 2025

    Moritz Reuss, Hongyi Zhou, Marcel R ¨uhle, ¨Omer Erdinc Yagmurlu, Fabian Otto, and Rudolf Lioutikov. FLOWER: Democratizing generalist robot policies with efficient vision-language-action flow policies.arXiv preprint arXiv:2509.04996, 2025. 6, 7, 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    Smolvla: A vision- language-action model for affordable and efficient robotics

    Mustafa Shukor, Dana Aubakirova, Francesco Capuano, Pepijn Kooijmans, Steven Palma, et al. Smolvla: A vision- language-action model for affordable and efficient robotics. arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.01844, 2025. 2, 5, 6, 7, 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    VLA-JEPA: Enhancing vision- language-action model with latent world model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.10098, 2026

    Jingwen Sun, Wenyao Zhang, Zekun Qi, Shaojie Ren, Zezhi Liu, Hanxin Zhu, et al. VLA-JEPA: Enhancing vision- language-action model with latent world model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.10098, 2026. 3

    arXiv 2026

  31. [31]

    Octo: An open-source generalist robot policy.arXiv preprint arXiv:2405.12213, 2024

    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. 2, 6

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    ACT- JEPA: Joint-embedding predictive architecture im- proves policy representation learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.14622, 2025

    Aleksandar Vujinovic and Aleksandar Kovacevic. ACT- JEPA: Joint-embedding predictive architecture im- proves policy representation learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.14622, 2025. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    LatentVLA: Taming latent space for gen- eralizable and long-horizon bimanual manipulation

    Junming Wang. LatentVLA: Taming latent space for gen- eralizable and long-horizon bimanual manipulation. InPro- ceedings of the AAAI Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 18593–18601, 2026. 1, 3

    2026

  34. [35]

    Vq-vla: Improving vision- language-action models via scaling vector-quantized ac- tion tokenizers

    Yating Wang, Haoyi Zhu, Mingyu Liu, Jiange Yang, Hao- Shu Fang, and Tong He. Vq-vla: Improving vision- language-action models via scaling vector-quantized ac- tion tokenizers. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Inter- national Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), 2025. arXiv:2507.01016. 3, 6

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  35. [37]

    TinyVLA: Towards fast, data- efficient vision-language-action models for robotic manipu- lation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.12514, 2024

    Junjie Wen, Yichen Zhu, Jinming Li, Minjie Zhu, Kun Wu, Zhiyuan Xu, et al. TinyVLA: Towards fast, data- efficient vision-language-action models for robotic manipu- lation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2409.12514, 2024. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [38]

    Unleashing large-scale video generative pre- training for visual robot manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.13139, 2023

    Hongtao Wu, Ya Jing, Chilam Cheang, Guangzeng Chen, Jiafeng Xu, Xinghang Li, Minghuan Liu, Hang Li, and Tao Kong. Unleashing large-scale video generative pre- training for visual robot manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.13139, 2023. 7

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  37. [39]

    CoLA-Flow policy: Tempo- rally coherent imitation learning via continuous latent ac- tion flow matching for robotic manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.23087, 2026

    Songwei Wu, Zhiduo Jiang, Guanghu Xie, Wandong Sun, Hong Liu, and Yang Liu. CoLA-Flow policy: Tempo- rally coherent imitation learning via continuous latent ac- tion flow matching for robotic manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2601.23087, 2026. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  38. [40]

    World action mod- els are zero-shot policies.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.15922,

    Seonghyeon Ye, Yunhao Ge, Kaiyuan Zheng, Shenyuan Gao, Sihyun Yu, George Kurian, et al. World action mod- els are zero-shot policies.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.15922,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  39. [41]

    Meta- world: A benchmark and evaluation for multi-task and meta reinforcement learning

    Tianhe Yu, Deirdre Quillen, Zhanpeng He, Ryan Julian, Karol Hausman, Chelsea Finn, and Sergey Levine. Meta- world: A benchmark and evaluation for multi-task and meta reinforcement learning. InProceedings of the Conference on Robot Learning, pages 1094–1100. PMLR, 2020. 2, 5, 7

    2020

  40. [42]

    DeeR-VLA: Dynamic inference of multimodal large language models for efficient robot execution

    Yang Yue, Yulin Wang, Bingyi Kang, Yizeng Han, Shenzhi Wang, Shiji Song, Jiashi Feng, and Gao Huang. DeeR-VLA: Dynamic inference of multimodal large language models for efficient robot execution. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 2024. 7

    2024

  41. [43]

    Root mean square layer nor- malization.Advances in neural information processing sys- tems, 32, 2019

    Biao Zhang and Rico Sennrich. Root mean square layer nor- malization.Advances in neural information processing sys- tems, 32, 2019. 12

    2019

  42. [44]

    VLA-4D: Embedding 4d aware- ness into vision-language-action models for spatiotem- porally coherent robotic manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.17199, 2025

    Haochen Zhang et al. VLA-4D: Embedding 4d aware- ness into vision-language-action models for spatiotem- porally coherent robotic manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.17199, 2025. 6

    arXiv 2025

  43. [45]

    Zhao, Vikash Kumar, Sergey Levine, and Chelsea Finn

    Tony Z. Zhao, Vikash Kumar, Sergey Levine, and Chelsea Finn. Learning fine-grained bimanual manipulation with low-cost hardware.arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.13705, 2023. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  44. [46]

    BEAST: Efficient tok- enization of b-splines encoded action sequences for imitation learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.06072, 2025

    Hongyi Zhou, Weiran Liao, Xi Huang, Yucheng Tang, Fabian Otto, Xiaogang Jia, et al. BEAST: Efficient tok- enization of b-splines encoded action sequences for imitation learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.06072, 2025. 3

    arXiv 2025

  45. [47]

    Unified world mod- els: Coupling video and action diffusion for pretraining on large robotic datasets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02792,

    Chuning Zhu, Raymond Yu, Siyuan Feng, Benjamin Burch- fiel, Paarth Shah, and Abhishek Gupta. Unified world mod- els: Coupling video and action diffusion for pretraining on large robotic datasets.arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.02792,

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  46. [48]

    Implementation Details This section provides architecture details and training pro- cedures details across all benchmarks

    3 EDAR: Learning Environment-Dependent Action Representations for Robotic Manipulation Supplementary Material A. Implementation Details This section provides architecture details and training pro- cedures details across all benchmarks. We describe the de- tails as follows. A.1. Architecture Overview.EDAR is implemented as an 8-layer Trans- former encoder ...