Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 7 minor 70 references

Even the best robot hand policies stall at 34% on new benchmark

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 · glm-5.2

2026-07-10 01:48 UTC pith:GEJZLFCP

load-bearing objection DexVerse is a well-built dexterous manipulation benchmark with a real coverage gap filled, but the headline 34% success ceiling is under-evidenced because only 19 of 100 tasks are evaluated and no data-scaling experiment separates task difficulty from data scarcity. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.08751 v1 pith:GEJZLFCP submitted 2026-07-09 cs.RO

DexVerse: A Modular Benchmark for Multi-Task, Multi-Embodiment Dexterous Manipulation

Yunchao Yao , Zhuxiu Xu , Tianqi Zhang , Zixian Liu , Sikai Li , Zhenyu Wei , Feng Chen , Dihong Huang
show 7 more authors
Kechang Wan Chenyang Ma Shuqi Zhao Shenghua Gao Masayoshi Tomizuka Yi Ma Mingyu Ding
This is my paper
classification cs.RO
keywords dexterous manipulationbenchmarkimitation learningmulti-embodimentvisuomotor generalizationrobot manipulationcontact-rich controlsimulation
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.

The paper introduces DexVerse, a simulation benchmark that tests robotic dexterous manipulation across 100 varied tasks, 18 arm-hand combinations, controllable visual conditions, and a dataset of 3,180 teleoperated demonstrations. The central claim is that when current leading policies are evaluated under this unified, multi-embodiment, multi-sensory regime, they collectively fail to generalize: no single method dominates across task types, and the best achieves only a 34% mean success rate. The paper argues that the field's progress on isolated skills does not yet translate to robust, general-purpose dexterous control, particularly for contact-rich precision and functional tool-use tasks.

Core claim

The paper discovers that the choice of observation modality is skill-dependent: 2D image-based policies excel at simple grasping where appearance determines the grasp pose, 3D point-cloud policies lead on functional tool use where explicit geometry helps localize tool tips, and language-conditioned flow-matching policies lead on articulated and precision-contact tasks where multi-stage subgoals must be disambiguated. No single representation or architecture dominates across all dexterous manipulation regimes, and tight-tolerance contact tasks (sub-centimeter alignment, sustained force regulation) produce near-zero success for every method tested.

What carries the argument

The benchmark's machinery is a modular, configuration-driven environment built on Isaac Lab that decouples task logic from robot embodiment. Tasks are specified as tuples of interactive objects, initial-state distributions, observation/action interfaces, and success predicates. A VR-based teleoperation pipeline using Apple Vision Pro captures human hand motion, retargets it to different dexterous hands via optimization, and records action-state pairs that can be deterministically replayed to regenerate any observation modality (proprioceptive, RGB, depth, point-cloud, state) without physics drift across machines.

Load-bearing premise

The claim that current policies are fundamentally limited rests on the assumption that evaluating 19 tasks out of 100 with identical training configurations for all methods gives each approach a fair chance. If the selected tasks disproportionately favor certain modalities, or if the uniform hyperparameters disadvantage particular architectures on specific task types, the 34% ceiling may overstate the field's limitations.

What would settle it

If a method given per-task hyperparameter tuning and modality-appropriate training data achieved substantially above 50% mean success across the same 19 tasks, or if the omitted 81 tasks proved systematically easier, the claim that DexVerse is unsaturated and that current methods are fundamentally limited would be weakened.

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

If this is right

  • If the 34% ceiling holds, then current internet-scale vision-language pretraining provides perception priors but does not transfer to the high-dimensional action manifold of multi-finger dexterous control, suggesting that dexterous policy learning requires embodiment-specific action representations rather than web-scale visual priors alone.
  • The skill-dependent modality split implies that general-purpose dexterous policies may need unified multi-modal architectures that dynamically weight 2D, 3D, and language inputs depending on task phase, rather than committing to a single sensing paradigm.
  • The universal failure on tight-tolerance contact tasks indicates that behavior cloning without explicit force feedback or closed-loop contact correction has a fundamental capability ceiling, motivating integration of tactile sensing or hybrid force/position control into future policy architectures.
  • The deterministic state-replay demonstration format could become a standard for cross-platform reproducibility, since it sidesteps the physics-divergence problem that makes sharing robot demonstration datasets across simulators unreliable.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The 34% ceiling may partly reflect the one-size-fits-all training configuration (950 episodes, identical hyperparameters across all methods and task types) rather than fundamental policy limitations; per-method tuning on specific task families could raise this number, which would not negate the benchmark's value but would weaken the claim that current methods are fundamentally stuck.
  • The 19 evaluated tasks out of 100 may not represent the full difficulty distribution; if the omitted 81 tasks skew easier (e.g., the 39 multi-goal composites), the benchmark's true average difficulty could differ from what the evaluation suggests.
  • The observation that different modalities win different skill families suggests a potential route to improvement via mixture-of-experts policies that route to the appropriate modality-specific decoder based on task context, which the paper does not explicitly propose but which the results strongly motivate.

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 / 7 minor

Summary. DexVerse is a modular simulation benchmark for dexterous manipulation comprising 100 tasks across 8 categories, 3 robot arms, 6 dexterous hands, configurable visual variation, and 3,180 VR-teleoperated demonstrations with synchronized multi-modal observations. The paper benchmarks four representative policies (Diffusion Policy, DP3, OpenVLA, and π₀.₅) on 19 tasks and reports a 34% mean success-rate ceiling. The benchmark design is well-structured: the task taxonomy is principled, the modular environment architecture (Figure 4) is clearly described, and the observation-mode presets (Table 5) provide a clean interface for diverse policy architectures. The dataset's action-state replay mechanism is a thoughtful design choice for cross-machine portability.

Significance. The primary contribution is the unification of broad dexterous task coverage, multi-embodiment support, controllable visual variation, and demonstration data in a single platform—addressing a real gap in the field. The modular configuration-driven design and the embodiment-agnostic teleoperation pipeline are practical and reusable. The empirical finding that no single method dominates across skill families (Table 3) is informative. However, the significance of the empirical claims is tempered by the evaluation covering only 19 of 100 tasks and by the fixed 50-demonstration-per-task training regime, which may conflate task difficulty with data scarcity.

major comments (3)
  1. Section 4.1 / Table 3: The central empirical claim that 'even the best-performing baselines achieve only 34% mean online success rate' is based on 19 of 100 tasks. The 19 evaluated tasks entirely exclude the multi-goal category (39 tasks, 39% of the benchmark) and the long-horizon category (5 tasks). Together, 44% of the benchmark's tasks have no policy evaluation. The paper should either (a) expand evaluation to include representative tasks from these categories, or (b) explicitly qualify the scope of the 'unsaturated' claim to the 19 evaluated tasks and discuss why the excluded categories were omitted. As stated, the claim that 'DexVerse remains highly challenging for current methods' implicitly extends to the full benchmark, but the evidence covers only a subset.
  2. Section 4.1: All four policies are trained on 50 demonstrations per task (950 total). For 28–56 dimensional action spaces in high-DoF dexterous manipulation, this is a very small dataset. The paper provides no data-scaling experiment to distinguish whether the 34% ceiling reflects fundamental task difficulty (validating the benchmark) or data scarcity (an artifact of the evaluation protocol). A scaling curve on at least 2–3 representative tasks (e.g., one contact-rich, one functional, one articulated) showing success rate vs. number of demonstrations (50, 100, 200, 400) would substantially strengthen the claim that the ceiling is attributable to task complexity rather than data quantity.
  3. Section 4.1, Finding 3: The claim that 'fine contact reasoning and sub-centimeter alignment remain unsolved across the board' is supported by zero or near-zero success on PushT, InsertPen, SlideUtilityKnife, and OpenLaptop. However, the paper does not report whether these tasks are solvable at all under the demonstration protocol—i.e., whether the VR teleoperation system can reliably collect successful demonstrations for them. If the teleoperation success rate on these tasks is also very low, the zero policy success may partly reflect demonstration quality or coverage rather than policy limitations. Reporting teleoperation success rates or the number of failed collection attempts for the hardest tasks would clarify whether the bottleneck is policy learning or demonstration collection.
minor comments (7)
  1. Table 1: The 'Parallel RL Env.' column uses ✓ for DexVerse but the paper does not present any RL experiments or RL training results. Clarifying whether this refers to environment capability (GPU-parallelized envs via Isaac Lab) or actual RL evaluation would help readers.
  2. Section 3.2: The paper mentions 'floating variants' for each hand but does not explain their purpose or when they should be used. A brief sentence on the intended use case (e.g., for ablation or simplified control studies) would improve clarity.
  3. Table 3: The task groupings in the table ('Pick-and-Lift,' 'Articulated,' 'Tool Use Functional,' 'Precision') do not exactly match the 8-category taxonomy in Table 2. Aligning the evaluation table's group labels with the taxonomy or providing a mapping would help readers cross-reference.
  4. Section 4.1, Finding 2: The paper states that 'language conditioning and a flow-matching action expert help disambiguate multi-stage subgoals' for π₀.₅, but no ablation isolating the effect of language conditioning or flow-matching is provided. The claim is plausible but speculative. Adding a brief caveat or providing per-task language instructions in the supplementary material would make these claims verifiable.
  5. Appendix B: The π₀.₅ configuration disables proprioceptive-state input ('the proprioceptive-state input is disabled'), while OpenVLA includes a 'learned proprioceptive projector.' This asymmetry in input modalities is not discussed in the main text. A note acknowledging this design difference and its potential effect on the comparison would be appropriate.
  6. The paper states 3,180 demonstrations but the breakdown (56 single-goal tasks × 55 + 5 long-horizon × 20 = 3,180) accounts for only 61 of the 100 tasks. Clarifying whether the remaining 39 multi-goal tasks have demonstrations, or stating that they are demonstration-free, would improve transparency.
  7. Figure 4 is referenced but the text description of the inheritance hierarchy is somewhat dense. A concrete example of a configuration override (e.g., showing the actual config fields for SqueezeScissors vs. OpenLaptop) would make the modularity claim more tangible.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity detected: benchmark tasks, success conditions, demonstrations, and policy evaluations are all defined independently of each other and of the evaluated methods' outputs.

full rationale

DexVerse is a benchmark paper whose derivation chain is straightforwardly non-circular. (1) Tasks are defined as T = (Ω, S₀, O, A, G) with success conditions implemented as simulator predicates (Sec. 3, Table 4) — these are geometric/threshold conditions (e.g., 'cube lifted at least 0.20 m above resetting height') that do not reference policy behavior. (2) The 3,180 demonstrations are collected via VR teleoperation by humans (Sec. 4), not generated by the evaluated policies. (3) The 34% success rate is an empirical measurement from rolling out four open-source policies (Diffusion Policy, DP3, OpenVLA, π₀.₅) in closed-loop simulation — it is not a fitted quantity renamed as a prediction. (4) While several self-citations exist in related works (e.g., [42], [43], [44], [51] share some co-authors), none are load-bearing for the benchmark's construction or the evaluation claims; the benchmark is built on Isaac Lab (external) and the evaluated policies are independent open-source implementations. The skeptic's concern about data scarcity (50 demos/task) conflating task difficulty with data efficiency is a validity threat, not a circularity — the measured success rates are genuine empirical outcomes, not definitions disguised as results. No step in the paper reduces to its own inputs by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

DexVerse is a benchmark paper, not a theoretical derivation, so it has no invented physical entities or mathematical constructs. The free parameters are design choices (task count, demonstration count, thresholds) rather than fitted constants. The axioms are domain assumptions about simulation fidelity and demonstration quality, plus the methodological assumption that 19 tasks represent 100.

free parameters (5)
  • Number of tasks = 100
    Chosen by design to span 8 manipulation categories; not derived from theory.
  • Demonstrations per single-goal task = 55
    50 with Shadow Hand + 5 with other hands; chosen to balance coverage and collection effort.
  • Training episodes per task = 50
    Fixed at 50 for all 19 evaluated tasks; not tuned per method or per task.
  • Evaluation rollouts per task = 50
    Chosen for statistical reliability; standard for manipulation benchmarks.
  • Success thresholds = task-specific (e.g., 0.20m lift, 80% joint travel)
    Defined per task in Table 4; chosen to represent task completion without being trivially easy.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Isaac Lab physics simulation is sufficiently realistic for evaluating dexterous manipulation policies
    The entire benchmark depends on Isaac Lab's GPU-accelerated physics being a valid testbed. Invoked throughout Section 3 and Appendix B.
  • domain assumption VR-based teleoperation produces demonstrations of sufficient quality for policy training
    The 3,180 demonstrations are collected via Apple Vision Pro hand tracking and dex-retargeting. The quality of these demonstrations directly affects policy training results. Invoked in Section 4.
  • ad hoc to paper The 19 evaluated tasks are representative of the full 100-task benchmark
    The paper evaluates 19 of 100 tasks but generalizes the '34% mean success' and 'substantial challenges' findings to the benchmark as a whole. Invoked in Section 4.1 and the Conclusion.
  • ad hoc to paper Identical training hyperparameters across all task types provide a fair comparison
    All four methods use the same 950 episodes and similar training configurations across all 19 tasks without per-task or per-method tuning. Invoked in Appendix B.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-glm · 23793 in / 2543 out tokens · 284475 ms · 2026-07-10T01:48:30.322866+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Building general-purpose dexterous manipulation policies requires benchmarks that go beyond isolated tasks to systematically evaluate policies across diverse interaction modes, sensory conditions, and robot embodiments. However, existing benchmarks remain limited in task and data diversity, embodiment coverage, or controllable visual variation, hindering studies of cross-task and cross-embodiment generalization. We present DexVerse, a large-scale and modular benchmark for dexterous manipulation. DexVerse includes 100 tasks spanning a broad range of manipulation skills, including object grasping and relocation, articulated-object interaction, functional tool use, bimanual coordination, non-prehensile control, contact-rich behaviors, multi-goal execution, and long-horizon multi-stage task completion. It supports 3 robot arms and 6 dexterous hands, and is extensible to new tasks, assets, and embodiments. To evaluate visuomotor generalization, DexVerse provides configurable visual variations in textures, background, lighting, and camera viewpoints. We further provide a VR-based teleoperation interface and 3,180 demonstrations with synchronized proprioceptive, RGB, depth, point-cloud, and state observations. We benchmark representative methods, including Diffusion Policy, DP3, OpenVLA, and $\pi_{0.5}$, across 19 tasks. Results reveal substantial challenges in task generalization and visuomotor robustness, establishing DexVerse as a promising testbed for general-purpose dexterous manipulation. Project page: https://ycyao216.github.io/DexVerse.site

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.08751 by Chenyang Ma, Dihong Huang, Feng Chen, Kechang Wan, Masayoshi Tomizuka, Mingyu Ding, Shenghua Gao, Shuqi Zhao, Sikai Li, Tianqi Zhang, Yi Ma, Yunchao Yao, Zhenyu Wei, Zhuxiu Xu, Zixian Liu.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Overview of DexVerse, a modular benchmark for multi-task, multi-embodiment dexterous [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Visualization of selected tasks from the DexVerse environments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Visualization of task progression of the 5 long-horizon tasks in DexVerse environments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Modular Environment Architecture DexVerse uses a configuration-driven design to specify and instantiate manipulation environ￾ments. Each environment is defined by a set of structured components, including the scene layout, object assets, robot embodiment, obser￾vation and action interfaces, initialization rules, success conditions, and randomization settings. Tasks within the same family share reusable tem… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Visual demonstration of embodiments and visual variation. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Teleoperation data collection system. Teleoperation Data Collection. We develop an embodiment￾adaptive teleoperation pipeline to scale demonstration collection in DexVerse. The system uses Apple Vision Pro through Isaac Lab’s CloudXR-based XR teleoperation interface [62], which streams simulation feedback to the headset and returns hand-tracking in￾puts for robot control. The tracked human wrist pose is us… 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

70 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · 28 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Kroemer, S

    O. Kroemer, S. Niekum, and G. Konidaris. A review of robot learning for manipulation: Challenges, representations, and algorithms, 2020. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/1907. 03146

    work page 2020

  2. [2]

    Billard and D

    A. Billard and D. Kragic. Trends and challenges in robot manipulation.Science, 364(6446): eaat8414, 2019. doi:10.1126/science.aat8414. URLhttps://www.science.org/doi/abs/ 10.1126/science.aat8414

    work page doi:10.1126/science.aat8414 2019

  3. [3]

    Learning Complex Dexterous Manipulation with Deep Reinforcement Learning and Demonstrations

    A. Rajeswaran, V . Kumar, A. Gupta, G. Vezzani, J. Schulman, E. Todorov, and S. Levine. Learning complex dexterous manipulation with deep reinforcement learning and demonstra- tions.arXiv preprint arXiv:1709.10087, 2017

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  4. [4]

    Suomalainen, Y

    M. Suomalainen, Y . Karayiannidis, and V . Kyrki. A survey of robot manipulation in con- tact.Robotics and Autonomous Systems, 156:104224, 2022. ISSN 0921-8890. doi:https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.robot.2022.104224. URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/ article/pii/S0921889022001312

    work page doi:10.1016/j.robot.2022.104224 2022

  5. [5]

    T. Z. Zhao, V . Kumar, S. Levine, and C. Finn. Learning fine-grained bimanual manipulation with low-cost hardware.arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.13705, 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    C. Chi, Z. Xu, S. Feng, E. Cousineau, Y . Du, B. Burchfiel, R. Tedrake, and S. Song. Diffusion policy: Visuomotor policy learning via action diffusion.The International Journal of Robotics Research, 44(10-11):1684–1704, 2025

    work page 2025

  7. [7]

    D. Jing, G. Wang, J. Liu, W. Tang, Z. Sun, Y . Yao, Z. Wei, Y . Liu, Z. Lu, and M. Ding. Mixture of horizons in action chunking.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.19433, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    What Matters in Learning from Offline Human Demonstrations for Robot Manipulation

    A. Mandlekar, D. Xu, J. Wong, S. Nasiriany, C. Wang, R. Kulkarni, L. Fei-Fei, S. Savarese, Y . Zhu, and R. Mart´ın-Mart´ın. What matters in learning from offline human demonstrations for robot manipulation. InarXiv preprint arXiv:2108.03298, 2021

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  9. [9]

    Mandlekar, S

    A. Mandlekar, S. Nasiriany, B. Wen, I. Akinola, Y . Narang, L. Fan, Y . Zhu, and D. Fox. Mimicgen: A data generation system for scalable robot learning using human demonstrations. In7th Annual Conference on Robot Learning, 2023

    work page 2023

  10. [10]

    Jiang, Y

    Z. Jiang, Y . Xie, K. Lin, Z. Xu, W. Wan, A. Mandlekar, L. Fan, and Y . Zhu. Dexmimicgen: Automated data generation for bimanual dexterous manipulation via imitation learning. In 2025 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), 2025

    work page 2025

  11. [11]

    Y . Wang, Z. Xian, F. Chen, T.-H. Wang, Y . Wang, K. Fragkiadaki, Z. Erickson, D. Held, and C. Gan. Robogen: Towards unleashing infinite data for automated robot learning via generative simulation, 2024. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2311.01455

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    Shridhar, L

    M. Shridhar, L. Manuelli, and D. Fox. Perceiver-actor: A multi-task transformer for robotic manipulation. InProceedings of the 6th Conference on Robot Learning (CoRL), 2022

    work page 2022

  13. [13]

    RVT: Robotic View Transformer for 3D Object Manipulation

    A. Goyal, J. Xu, Y . Guo, V . Blukis, Y .-W. Chao, and D. Fox. Rvt: Robotic view transformer for 3d object manipulation.arXiv:2306.14896, 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  14. [14]

    Goyal, V

    A. Goyal, V . Blukis, J. Xu, Y . Guo, Y .-W. Chao, and D. Fox. Rvt2: Learning precise manipu- lation from few demonstrations.RSS, 2024

    work page 2024

  15. [15]

    Y . Ze, G. Zhang, K. Zhang, C. Hu, M. Wang, and H. Xu. 3d diffusion policy: Generalizable visuomotor policy learning via simple 3d representations. InProceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems (RSS), 2024. 9

    work page 2024

  16. [16]

    RT-1: Robotics Transformer for Real-World Control at Scale

    A. Brohan, N. Brown, J. Carbajal, Y . Chebotar, J. Dabis, C. Finn, K. Gopalakrishnan, K. Haus- man, A. Herzog, J. Hsu, J. Ibarz, B. Ichter, A. Irpan, T. Jackson, S. Jesmonth, N. Joshi, R. Ju- lian, D. Kalashnikov, Y . Kuang, I. Leal, K.-H. Lee, S. Levine, Y . Lu, U. Malla, D. Manjunath, I. Mordatch, O. Nachum, C. Parada, J. Peralta, E. Perez, K. Pertsch, ...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  17. [17]

    Open X-Embodiment: Robotic Learning Datasets and RT-X Models

    E. Collaboration, A. O’Neill, A. Rehman, A. Gupta, A. Maddukuri, A. Gupta, A. Padalkar, A. Lee, A. Pooley, A. Gupta, A. Mandlekar, A. Jain, A. Tung, A. Bewley, A. Herzog, A. Ir- pan, A. Khazatsky, A. Rai, A. Gupta, A. Wang, A. Kolobov, A. Singh, A. Garg, A. Kembhavi, A. Xie, A. Brohan, A. Raffin, A. Sharma, A. Yavary, A. Jain, A. Balakrishna, A. Wahid, B....

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    Ghosh, H

    Octo Model Team, D. Ghosh, H. Walke, K. Pertsch, K. Black, O. Mees, S. Dasari, J. Hejna, C. Xu, J. Luo, T. Kreiman, Y . Tan, L. Y . Chen, P. Sanketi, Q. Vuong, T. Xiao, D. Sadigh, C. Finn, and S. Levine. Octo: An open-source generalist robot policy. InProceedings of Robotics: Science and Systems, Delft, Netherlands, 2024

    work page 2024

  19. [19]

    M. Kim, K. Pertsch, S. Karamcheti, T. Xiao, A. Balakrishna, S. Nair, R. Rafailov, E. Foster, G. Lam, P. Sanketi, Q. Vuong, T. Kollar, B. Burchfiel, R. Tedrake, D. Sadigh, S. Levine, P. Liang, and C. Finn. Openvla: An open-source vision-language-action model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2406.09246, 2024. 10

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    $\pi_0$: A Vision-Language-Action Flow Model for General Robot Control

    K. Black, N. Brown, D. Driess, A. Esmail, M. Equi, C. Finn, N. Fusai, L. Groom, K. Hausman, B. Ichter, et al.π 0: A vision-language-action flow model for general robot control.arXiv preprint arXiv:2410.24164, 2024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  21. [21]

    $\pi_{0.5}$: a Vision-Language-Action Model with Open-World Generalization

    P. Intelligence, K. Black, N. Brown, J. Darpinian, K. Dhabalia, D. Driess, A. Esmail, M. Equi, C. Finn, N. Fusai, et al.π 0.5: a vision-language-action model with open-world generalization. arXiv preprint arXiv:2504.16054, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  22. [22]

    O. Mees, L. Hermann, E. Rosete-Beas, and W. Burgard. Calvin: A benchmark for language- conditioned policy learning for long-horizon robot manipulation tasks.IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters (RA-L), 7(3):7327–7334, 2022

    work page 2022

  23. [23]

    T. Chen, Z. Chen, B. Chen, Z. Cai, Y . Liu, Z. Li, Q. Liang, X. Lin, Y . Ge, Z. Gu, et al. Robotwin 2.0: A scalable data generator and benchmark with strong domain randomization for robust bimanual robotic manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2506.18088, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    S. Tao, F. Xiang, A. Shukla, Y . Qin, X. Hinrichsen, X. Yuan, C. Bao, X. Lin, Y . Liu, T. kai Chan, Y . Gao, X. Li, T. Mu, N. Xiao, A. Gurha, V . N. Rajesh, Y . W. Choi, Y .-R. Chen, Z. Huang, R. Calandra, R. Chen, S. Luo, and H. Su. Maniskill3: Gpu parallelized robotics simulation and rendering for generalizable embodied ai.Robotics: Science and Systems, 2025

    work page 2025

  25. [25]

    B. Liu, Y . Zhu, C. Gao, Y . Feng, Q. Liu, Y . Zhu, and P. Stone. Libero: Benchmarking knowl- edge transfer for lifelong robot learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.03310, 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  26. [26]

    Y . Chen, Y . Yang, T. Wu, S. Wang, X. Feng, J. Jiang, Z. Lu, S. M. McAleer, H. Dong, and S.-C. Zhu. Towards human-level bimanual dexterous manipulation with reinforcement learning. In Thirty-sixth Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2022. URLhttps://openreview.net/forum?id=D29JbExncTP

    work page 2022

  27. [27]

    H. Wang, W. Zhao, X. Wang, S. Huang, H. Lin, B. Zheng, R. Xu, G. Wang, Y . Mu, H. Wang, L. Fan, H. Li, Z. Zhang, and T. Tan. Dexjoco: A benchmark and toolkit for task-oriented dexterous manipulation on mujoco, 2026. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2605.16257

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  28. [28]

    F. Chen, T. Chu, L. Sun, P. Zhou, Z. Xu, S. Gao, Y . Zhai, Y . Yang, and Y . Ma. Dexholdem: Playing texas hold’em with dexterous embodied system, 2026. URLhttps://arxiv.org/ abs/2605.18727

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  29. [29]

    Y . Wang, J. Ye, C. Xiao, Y . Zhong, H. Tao, H. Yu, Y . Liu, J. Yu, and Y . Ma. Dexh2r: A benchmark for dynamic dexterous grasping in human-to-robot handover, 2025. URLhttps: //arxiv.org/abs/2506.23152

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Franka research 3.https://franka.de/franka-research-3, 2026

    Franka Robotics. Franka research 3.https://franka.de/franka-research-3, 2026. Accessed: 2026-05-22

    work page 2026

  31. [31]

    Accessed: 2026-05-22

    Universal Robots.UR10e Technical Specification, 2024. Accessed: 2026-05-22

    work page 2024

  32. [32]

    Accessed: 2026-05-22

    UFACTORY.xArm User Manual, 2023. Accessed: 2026-05-22

    work page 2023

  33. [33]

    Sharpa wave.https://www.sharpa.com/pages/wave, 2026

    Sharpa Robotics. Sharpa wave.https://www.sharpa.com/pages/wave, 2026. Accessed: 2026-05-22

    work page 2026

  34. [34]

    Accessed: 2026-05-22

    WUJI TECH.WUJI Hand Product Introduction, 2026. Accessed: 2026-05-22

    work page 2026

  35. [35]

    Shadow dexterous hand series.https://shadowrobot.com/ dexterous-hand-series/, 2026

    Shadow Robot Company. Shadow dexterous hand series.https://shadowrobot.com/ dexterous-hand-series/, 2026. Accessed: 2026-05-22

    work page 2026

  36. [36]

    The dexterous hands.https://en.inspire-robots.com/ product-category/the-dexterous-hands, 2026

    Inspire Robots. The dexterous hands.https://en.inspire-robots.com/ product-category/the-dexterous-hands, 2026. Accessed: 2026-05-22. 11

    work page 2026

  37. [37]

    Allegro hand.https://www.allegrohand.com/, 2026

    Allegro Hand. Allegro hand.https://www.allegrohand.com/, 2026. Accessed: 2026-05- 22

    work page 2026

  38. [38]

    K. Shaw, A. Agarwal, and D. Pathak. Leap hand: Low-cost, efficient, and anthropomorphic hand for robot learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.06440, 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  39. [39]

    McLean, E

    R. McLean, E. Chatzaroulas, L. McCutcheon, F. R ¨oder, T. Yu, Z. He, K. Zentner, R. Julian, J. K. Terry, I. Woungang, N. Farsad, and P. S. Castro. Meta-world+: An improved, stan- dardized, RL benchmark. InThe Thirty-ninth Annual Conference on Neural Information Pro- cessing Systems Datasets and Benchmarks Track, 2025. URLhttps://openreview.net/ forum?id=1...

    work page 2025

  40. [40]

    James, Z

    S. James, Z. Ma, D. Rovick Arrojo, and A. J. Davison. Rlbench: The robot learning benchmark & learning environment.IEEE Robotics and Automation Letters, 2020

    work page 2020

  41. [41]

    C. Bao, H. Xu, Y . Qin, and X. Wang. DexArt: Benchmarking generalizable dexterous ma- nipulation with articulated objects. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 21190–21200, 2023

    work page 2023

  42. [42]

    DexCompose: Reusing Dexterous Policies for Multi-Task Manipulation with a Single Hand

    D. Huang, Z. Wei, Z. Xu, Y . Yao, S. Li, and M. Ding. Dexcompose: Reusing dexterous policies for multi-task manipulation with a single hand.arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.28323, 2026

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  43. [43]

    S. Li, S. Li, Z. Wei, Y . Yao, C. Li, and M. Ding. Coordex: Coordinating body and hand pri- ors for continuous dexterous humanoid loco-manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2606.23680, 2026

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  44. [44]

    Liang, Y

    Z. Liang, Y . Mu, Y . Wang, T. Chen, W. Shao, W. Zhan, M. Tomizuka, P. Luo, and M. Ding. Dexhanddiff: Interaction-aware diffusion planning for adaptive dexterous manipulation. In Proceedings of the Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Conference, pages 1745–1755, 2025

    work page 2025

  45. [45]

    R. Wang, J. Zhang, J. Chen, Y . Xu, P. Li, T. Liu, and H. Wang. Dexgraspnet: A large-scale robotic dexterous grasp dataset for general objects based on simulation. In2023 IEEE Inter- national Conference on Robotics and Automation, pages 11359–11366, 2023

    work page 2023

  46. [46]

    Y . Xu, W. Wan, J. Zhang, H. Liu, Z. Shan, H. Shen, R. Wang, H. Geng, Y . Weng, J. Chen, T. Liu, L. Yi, and H. Wang. UniDexGrasp: Universal robotic dexterous grasping via learning diverse proposal generation and goal-conditioned policy. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), pages 4737–4746, 2023

    work page 2023

  47. [47]

    W. Wan, H. Geng, Y . Liu, Z. Shan, Y . Yang, L. Yi, and H. Wang. UniDexGrasp++: Improving dexterous grasping policy learning via geometry-aware curriculum and iterative generalist- specialist learning. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), pages 3891–3902, 2023

    work page 2023

  48. [48]

    Zhang, H

    J. Zhang, H. Liu, D. Li, X. Yu, H. Geng, Y . Ding, J. Chen, and H. Wang. Dexgraspnet 2.0: Learning generative dexterous grasping in large-scale synthetic cluttered scenes. InProceed- ings of the 8th Conference on Robot Learning, volume 270 ofProceedings of Machine Learn- ing Research. PMLR, 2025

    work page 2025

  49. [49]

    Zhang, Q

    G. Zhang, Q. Xu, H. Zhang, J. Ma, L. He, Y . Bao, Z. Ping, Z. Yuan, C. Lu, C. Yuan, et al. Unidex: A robot foundation suite for universal dexterous hand control from egocentric hu- man videos. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition, pages 1841–1852, 2026

    work page 2026

  50. [50]

    S. Zhao, X. Zhu, Y . Chen, C. Li, Y . Xie, X. Zhang, M. Ding, and M. Tomizuka. Dexh2r: Task-oriented dexterous manipulation from human to robots.IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics, 2025. 12

    work page 2025

  51. [51]

    C. Ma, Y . Yao, Z. Wei, R. Li, D. Szafir, and M. Ding. Current as touch: Proprioceptive contact feedback for compliant dexterous manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2607.03529, 2026

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  52. [52]

    K. Lei, H. Li, D. Yu, Z. Wei, L. Guo, Z. Jiang, Z. Wang, S. Liang, and H. Xu. Rl- 100: Performant robotic manipulation with real-world reinforcement learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2510.14830, 2025

    work page arXiv 2025

  53. [53]

    Tobin, R

    J. Tobin, R. Fong, A. Ray, J. Schneider, W. Zaremba, and P. Abbeel. Domain randomization for transferring deep neural networks from simulation to the real world. In2017 IEEE/RSJ international conference on intelligent robots and systems (IROS), pages 23–30. IEEE, 2017

    work page 2017

  54. [54]

    Y . Zhu, Z. Jiang, P. Stone, and Y . Zhu. Learning generalizable manipulation policies with object-centric 3d representations.arXiv preprint arXiv:2310.14386, 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    O. M. Andrychowicz, B. Baker, M. Chociej, R. Jozefowicz, B. McGrew, J. Pachocki, A. Petron, M. Plappert, G. Powell, A. Ray, et al. Learning dexterous in-hand manipulation. The International Journal of Robotics Research, 39(1):3–20, 2020

    work page 2020

  56. [56]

    Z. Wei, Z. Xu, J. Guo, Y . Hou, C. Gao, Z. Cai, J. Luo, and L. Shao.D(R,O)grasp: A unified representation of robot and object interaction for cross-embodiment dexterous grasping. In 2025 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA), pages 4982–4988,

    work page 2025

  57. [57]

    doi:10.1109/ICRA55743.2025.11127754

    work page doi:10.1109/icra55743.2025.11127754 2025

  58. [58]

    Scaling Cross-Embodied Learning: One Policy for Manipulation, Navigation, Locomotion and Aviation

    R. Doshi, H. Walke, O. Mees, S. Dasari, and S. Levine. Scaling cross-embodied learn- ing: One policy for manipulation, navigation, locomotion and aviation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2408.11812, 2024

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    P. Li, T. Liu, Y . Li, Y . Zhu, Y . Yang, and S. Huang. Gendexgrasp: Generalizable dexterous grasping.arXiv preprint arXiv:2210.00722, 2022

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  60. [60]

    Z. Wei, Y . Yao, and M. Ding. One hand to rule them all: Canonical representations for unified dexterous manipulation.arXiv preprint arXiv:2602.16712, 2026

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  61. [61]

    Xiang, Y

    F. Xiang, Y . Qin, K. Mo, Y . Xia, H. Zhu, F. Liu, M. Liu, H. Jiang, Y . Yuan, H. Wang, L. Yi, A. X. Chang, L. J. Guibas, and H. Su. SAPIEN: A simulated part-based interactive environ- ment. InProceedings of the IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recogni- tion, 2020

    work page 2020

  62. [62]

    K. Wang, T. Chen, J. Liu, H. Su, S. Zhu, M. Wang, Z. Li, Y . Chen, H.-a. Gao, Y . Qin, J. Wang, Q. Zhang, L. Xu, J. Yu, Y . Mu, and P. Luo. ManiTwin: Scaling data-generation-ready digital object dataset to 100k.arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.16866, 2026

    work page arXiv 2026

  63. [63]

    Isaac Lab: A GPU-Accelerated Simulation Framework for Multi-Modal Robot Learning

    M. Mittal, P. Roth, J. Tigue, et al. Isaac Lab: A gpu-accelerated simulation framework for multi-modal robot learning.arXiv preprint arXiv:2511.04831, 2025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Isaac Sim Assets.https://docs.isaacsim.omniverse.nvidia.com/latest/ assets/usd_assets_overview.html, 2026

    NVIDIA. Isaac Sim Assets.https://docs.isaacsim.omniverse.nvidia.com/latest/ assets/usd_assets_overview.html, 2026. Accessed: 2026-05-28

    work page 2026

  65. [65]

    Z. Lan, Y . Jiang, R. Wang, X. Xie, R. Zhang, Y . Zhu, P. Li, T. Yang, T. Chen, H. Gao, X. Yang, X. Li, H. Zhang, Y . Mu, and P. Luo. Autobio: A simulation and benchmark for robotic au- tomation in digital biology laboratory, 2025. URLhttps://arxiv.org/abs/2505.14030

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    Synthesis Sim-Ready Assets.https://huggingface.co/datasets/Extwin/ Synthesis-Sim-Ready-Assets, 2025

    Extwin. Synthesis Sim-Ready Assets.https://huggingface.co/datasets/Extwin/ Synthesis-Sim-Ready-Assets, 2025. Accessed: 2026-05-28

    work page 2025

  67. [67]

    Meshy Image to 3D API.https://docs.meshy.ai/en/api/image-to-3d, 2026

    Meshy. Meshy Image to 3D API.https://docs.meshy.ai/en/api/image-to-3d, 2026. Accessed: 2026-05-28

    work page 2026

  68. [68]

    Poly Haven HDRIs.https://polyhaven.com/hdris, 2026

    Poly Haven. Poly Haven HDRIs.https://polyhaven.com/hdris, 2026. Accessed: 2026- 05-28. 13

    work page 2026

  69. [69]

    Y . Qin, W. Yang, B. Huang, K. Van Wyk, H. Su, X. Wang, Y .-W. Chao, and D. Fox. Anyteleop: A general vision-based dexterous robot arm-hand teleoperation system.arXiv preprint arXiv:2307.04577, 2023

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  70. [70]

    M. J. Kim, C. Finn, and P. Liang. Fine-tuning vision-language-action models: Optimizing speed and success.arXiv preprint arXiv:2502.19645, 2025. 14 Appendix A Task List and Visualization Table 4: Task list with category, task name, task description, success condition, and environment rendering. Categorytask nameDescription Success condition rendering PRIM...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025