Memory Proxy Maps for Visual Navigation

Ashwin Ashok; Bryan Bo Cao; Faith Johnson; Kristin Dana; Shubham Jain

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 17 references

Memory Proxy Maps for Visual Navigation

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper claims that recording observations in a self-supervised latent space as a memory proxy map removes the need for graphs, odometry, RL, and metric maps in visual navigation, and that FeudalNav achieves state-of-the-art image-goal…

desk verdict Serious empirical result with a load-bearing unvalidated component: FeudalNav's no-odometry/no-graph claim rests on an isomap-imitator that is never checked on novel environments, and the paper needs code, seeds, and error bars before the headline numbers can be trusted. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.09893 v2 pith:GIPJFDIT submitted 2024-11-15 cs.CV

Faith Johnson , Bryan Bo Cao , Ashwin Ashok , Shubham Jain , Kristin Dana This is my paper · ORCID

classification cs.CV

keywords visualnavigationimage-goalfeudallearningmemoryproxymaplatentspaceno-odometryself-supervisedrepresentationwaypointprediction

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

FeudalNav is a three-tier visual navigation agent for the image-goal task: a high-level manager keeps a memory proxy map, a mid-level manager predicts waypoints by imitating human point-click navigation, and a low-level worker turns the waypoint and depth into three discrete actions. The central claim is that a density map built in a contrastively learned latent space, rather than a graph or metric map, is a sufficient memory for navigating previously unseen indoor environments. If that holds, visual navigation can work without odometry, without reinforcement learning, without simulator-based training, and without explicit mapping, using orders of magnitude less training data than standard baselines. The paper reports success/SPL of 67.5/55.5 on straight and 60.2/39.1 on curved image-goal trials in unseen Gibson environments, outperforming NRNS+SLING and OVRL+SLING.

What carries the argument

The memory proxy map (MPM) is the central object: it is built by training a SMoG contrastive latent space on image clusters formed by SuperGlue keypoint matching, fitting a 2D isomap embedding of the training-trajectory SMoG features, training a two-layer MLP (the isomap imitator) to map any SMoG feature to those 2D coordinates, and adding a Gaussian window with sigma 1 to the predicted location for every incoming observation. The density of the MPM is the memory signal. WayNet, a modified ResNet-18, consumes the current RGBD observation plus an MPM crop and outputs a waypoint pixel coordinate. The low-level worker is a four-layer MLP with PReLU that classifies the depth-plus-waypoint input into one of three discrete actions.

What would settle it

In an unseen Gibson environment, collect a trajectory of observations with ground-truth positions, compute the isomap imitator's predicted 2D coordinates for those observations, and measure the rank correlation between predicted pairwise distances and ground-truth geodesic distances; if the correlation is near zero or physically distant views overlap in the predicted map, the memory proxy does not encode exploration and the central claim fails. A complementary test is to replace the isomap-imitator coordinates in the MPM with ground-truth metric coordinates: if FeudalNav performance does not improve or degrades, the MPM is not carrying the navigation signal.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The discovery is that a memory proxy map, a fixed-size 2D density map of observation positions predicted in a learned latent space, carries enough spatial information to guide no-odometry visual navigation. The high-level manager records each RGBD observation as a Gaussian window at its predicted 2D latent location, and the density of this map indicates how thoroughly a region has been explored. This map is passed, as an image crop centered on the agent's current position, together with the current RGBD observation, to WayNet, which regresses a waypoint pixel coordinate in the first-person view to imitate human exploration choices from the LA VN dataset. A low-level worker classifier then selects turn-left, turn-right, or move-forward actions from the depth map and waypoint input. The paper's claim is that this feudal division, trained on roughly 37,000 frames of human navigation data with no simulator and no RL, reaches state-of-the-art performance on the image-goal task in previously unseen Gibson environments.

Load-bearing premise

The isomap imitator, trained on a single 2D embedding of SMoG features from the training trajectories, must produce stable and meaningful 2D coordinates when applied to images from unseen Gibson environments; if novel images collapse or scatter inconsistently, the Gaussian-window density map will not reflect physical exploration and WayNet receives a corrupted memory proxy map.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

FeudalNav reports success/SPL of 67.5/55.5 on straight and 60.2/39.1 on curved image-goal trials in unseen Gibson environments, above NRNS+SLING and OVRL+SLING.
A latent-space density map suffices as a no-graph memory: the MPM provides exploration signal and lets the agent localize roughly with respect to its own past observations.
Human point-click waypoint choices are learnable from about 37,000 frames and transfer zero-shot to unseen environments.
The whole hierarchy trains in about 3 million iterations, compared with the 10-100 million iterations reported for RL baselines.
Ablations show the gaussian-weighted MPM outperforms binary map variants, indicating that density weighting is load-bearing for image-goal success.

Reading between the lines

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

If the isomap imitator's generalization is stable, the MPM could support continual navigation by simply adding new Gaussian windows, with no graph rebuild or optimization, which the paper does not explicitly claim.
Because the strongest gains over baselines appear on curved trajectories, the memory proxy may matter most when paths loop and revisit similar views; straight-line trials may understate its value.
A natural next test, not reported here, is deployment on a low-cost robot with noisy depth, since removing odometry and graphs is precisely the setting where FeudalNav's design should be advantageous.
The fixed isomap embedding could be extended by an online or metric-learned coordinate mapping to handle environments visually far from Gibson, which the paper does not address.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Kick: this is a serious empirical result that deserves a real referee, but the headline no-odometry/no-RL/no-graph claim rests on an unvalidated learned map, and the paper needs code and error bars before the numbers can be taken at face value.

What's new: FeudalNav combines SMoG contrastive features, an isomap-imitator that projects observations into a 2D memory proxy map, a supervised WayNet that mimics human point-click waypoints, and a low-level action classifier. That particular stack has not been tested before, and the reported success/SPL on the NRNS image-goal task beat NRNS+SLING and OVRL+SLING with far fewer training images and no odometry. The ablation in Table 2 is useful: it isolates the gaussian MPM from binary variants and from no-memory, showing a real contribution from the map. Credit where due: the writing is clear, the experimental protocol follows NRNS exactly, and the method is computationally light.

Soft spots, in rough order of importance. First, the isomap imitator is trained on a single embedding of the training set; the paper never checks what coordinates it produces for novel images from unseen Gibson homes. If those coordinates collapse or jump, the MPM is not a map and WayNet's crop is meaningless. That is a load-bearing assumption and it is only indirectly supported by the overall success numbers. Second, there are no error bars, no multiple seeds, and no code; the thresholds αc/αk/αm/ψ and σ are 'chosen empirically' with no validation procedure. Third, the abstract says no training in simulators, but LA VN is a dataset of human teleoperation in Gibson; that overstates the case. Fourth, the ablation has an oddity: the 3-timestep version with the classification worker collapses on curved trials (25.3% success vs 60.2% for the single-timestep version) and the paper does not mention it. That could be a sign of instability or a reporting issue; either way it needs explanation.

The central argument — that a learned feature-space memory can replace graphs and odometry for image-goal navigation — holds up as a proof of concept, but is not yet a verified SOTA claim. A serious referee should engage, and a revision should add code, seeds, variance, held-out isomap validation, and a correction of the simulator-training wording.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. FeudalNav is a three-tier visual navigation agent for image-goal navigation in unseen Gibson environments. The high-level manager builds a memory proxy map (MPM) by projecting contrastively learned SMoG features into 2D via an isomap-imitator MLP and accumulating Gaussian density; the mid-level WayNet predicts human-style waypoint pixels; the low-level worker maps depth and waypoint inputs to discrete actions. Training uses 117 LA VN trajectories (36,834 frames) and no RL, graph, odometry, or metric map. The paper reports state-of-the-art success/SPL on straight and curved image-goal trials and an ablation showing that the MPM contributes substantially to performance.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a significant efficiency argument: competitive navigation with orders of magnitude less data and compute than RL baselines, and without odometry or explicit graphs. The ablation in Table 2 isolates the MPM and the Gaussian form of the map, giving a clear causal story, and the paper is transparent about the amount of training data and compute used. The main risk is that the paper does not validate that the isomap-imitator's 2D predictions are spatially coherent in unseen environments, which is exactly what the 'memory proxy map' claim requires; additionally, the empirical comparisons are single-run with no error bars. Both concerns are addressable and do not invalidate the approach's potential, but they need to be resolved before the SOTA claim can be accepted.

major comments (3)

[Section 3, High-Level Manager: Memory (isomap imitator paragraph)] The MPM's spatial validity in unseen environments is asserted but never measured. Isomap is fitted once to training-data SMoG features, and an MLP is trained to regress those 2D coordinates. At inference every observation is placed at the MLP's predicted coordinate and blurred with a Gaussian, but there is no experiment showing that predicted coordinates for novel Gibson images preserve neighborhood structure, avoid collapse or overlap, or are stable across embedding runs. Because this coordinate placement is the mechanism by which the agent 'remembers visited regions' and 'removes the need for graphs and odometry,' this is a load-bearing validation gap. Please add (i) predicted-versus-ground-truth trajectory plots on held-out environments, (ii) a quantitative correlation between pairwise isomap-imitator distances and geodesic distances on held-out trajectories, and (iii) ablations over projection choices (e.g., PCA/UMAP, Procrustes-aligned isomap, or a metric-learned embedding) to show that the specific isomap-imitator choice, rather than the density map alone, is what makes the MPM effective.
[Tables 1 and 2, Section 5] All headline success/SPL numbers and all ablation increments (including the claimed 25% and 28% gains in Section 6) are reported without error bars, multiple seeds, or significance tests. Since the reported differences between FeudalNav and the strongest baselines are on the order of 5–9% on average success, a single run does not establish SOTA; the ablation differences are similarly unquantified. Please report means and standard deviations over at least 3–5 training runs, or episode-level bootstrap confidence intervals, and state whether the same seed and checkpoint selection procedure was used across all ablations.
[Section 4, Training and Testing Procedure] The thresholds alpha_c = alpha_k = alpha_m = 0.7, psi = 0.85, sigma = 1, and the 1m stop depth are stated as empirically chosen, but no sensitivity analysis is provided. The stop condition (alpha_m with depth/psi) and the WayNet keypoint override (alpha_k) directly determine whether trials terminate or continue, so the reported SPL and success numbers could depend strongly on these values. Please add a validation-set sweep over these parameters, at least for alpha_k, alpha_m, and psi, and report the chosen operating point; without this, the method is under-specified for reproduction.

minor comments (5)

[Section 3, isomap imitator paragraph] The sentence 'Because isomap produces different embedding coordinates each time it is run' is technically inaccurate for a fixed dataset and neighborhood graph; isomap is deterministic. If the authors mean the embedding is defined only up to isometry or reflection, they should say that explicitly and explain how the MLP is trained to a consistent coordinate frame.
[Figure 4, Section 6] The claim that SMoG 'most closely resembles' the ground-truth distance matrix is based on visual inspection of a single trajectory. Report a quantitative distance-correlation metric, such as Spearman correlation, over several trajectories, ideally on held-out environments.
[Section 6, ablation text] There are small presentation issues in the ablation section: 'a25% increase' should read 'a 25% increase', the table uses both 'Cl' and 'Cls' for the classifier worker, and the header 'S T R A I G H T' has stray formatting.
[Abstract and Section 4] The paper says 'no training in simulators,' but evaluation is performed in the Habitat simulator on Gibson scenes. Clarify that the claim refers to no simulator-based training or RL, not to avoiding simulators altogether.
[Footnote, Section 7] The footnote 'Code released upon publication' is not a substitute for reproducibility details. Please state whether the LA VN dataset is publicly available and how the 117 training trajectories were split from the evaluation episodes, since all training depends on this dataset.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation; the only flagged item is a non-load-bearing author self-citation to the LA VN dataset.

full rationale

FeudalNav's derivation chain is not circular by construction. The memory proxy map is produced by contrastively learning a latent space (SMoG) and training an MLP ('isomap imitator') to reproduce isomap embeddings of training SMoG features; the resulting 2D coordinates are an intermediate self-supervised representation, and no term in the reported metric (success and SPL on held-out Gibson trials, Eq. 1) is defined as a function of those coordinates or of any other fitted parameter. WayNet is supervised by human point clicks and the worker by human actions from the LA VN dataset, which are external training signals rather than outputs of the model being evaluated. The paper does cite its own LA VN dataset (Johnson et al., 2024), but the dataset is a data-collection artifact used as training input; the central performance claim is tested on previously unseen Gibson environments against NRNS and OVRL baselines, so the self-citation is not load-bearing. Section 3's isomap imitator is not quantitatively validated on out-of-sample observations, and Section 7 defers code release, but these are reproducibility and generalization risks, not cases of a prediction reducing to its inputs by definition.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The ledger contains no new physical entities; the memory proxy map is a learned representation rather than a postulated entity. The central claim rests on hand-tuned thresholds (αc, αk, αm, ψ, σ, stopping depth) and on empirical assumptions about Superglue reliability, the transferability of LA VN human demonstrations, and the stability of the isomap imitator projection on unseen scenes.

free parameters (6)

conf_threshold_alpha_c = 0.7
Superglue cluster confidence threshold for building positive pairs and for goal matching; chosen empirically in Section 4 without a specified validation split.
conf_threshold_alpha_k = 0.7
Keypoint match confidence for goal detection in the mid-level manager; chosen empirically in Section 4.
conf_threshold_alpha_m = 0.7
Keypoint match confidence for the stopping condition; chosen empirically in Section 4.
psi_ratio = 0.85
Ratio of matched keypoint area to total image size used in the stopping condition; chosen empirically in Section 4.
gaussian_sigma = 1
Standard deviation of the gaussian window added to the memory proxy map for each observation; fixed hand choice in Section 3.
stop_depth = 1m
Depth threshold for stopping near the goal location; specified in Section 3.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Superglue keypoint matching provides reliable visual similarity for clustering, goal matching, and stopping decisions.
Positive pair construction for contrastive learning and the goal detection / stopping conditions depend on Superglue confidence; if unreliable in test environments, the MPM and termination logic would break.
domain assumption LA VN human teleoperation trajectories are a representative policy for exploration and navigation in unseen scenes.
WayNet and the low-level worker are trained on these demonstrations; the paper assumes human point-clicks transfer to Gibson test environments.
domain assumption Isomap embedding of training SMoG features provides a faithful 2D representation for novel observations.
The MPM coordinates come from an MLP imitating isomap computed on training data only; this projection must generalize to test scenes.
domain assumption Habitat/Gibson simulator dynamics and RGBD observations are sufficient for evaluating image-goal navigation.
All results are in simulation; real-world transfer is not tested, so the evaluation is limited to this simulator domain.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Memory Proxy Maps for Visual Navigation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GIPJFDIT

@misc{pith2026241109893,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Memory Proxy Maps for Visual Navigation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GIPJFDIT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.09893}
}

read the original abstract

Visual navigation takes inspiration from humans, who navigate in previously unseen environments using vision without detailed environment maps. Inspired by this, we introduce a novel no-RL, no-graph, no-odometry approach to visual navigation using feudal learning to build a three tiered agent. Key to our approach is a memory proxy map (MPM), an intermediate representation of the environment learned in a self-supervised manner by the high-level manager agent that serves as a simplified memory, approximating what the agent has seen. We demonstrate that recording observations in this learned latent space is an effective and efficient memory proxy that can remove the need for graphs and odometry in visual navigation tasks. For the mid-level manager agent, we develop a waypoint network (WayNet) that outputs intermediate subgoals, or waypoints, imitating human waypoint selection during local navigation. For the low-level worker agent, we learn a classifier over a discrete action space that avoids local obstacles and moves the agent towards the WayNet waypoint. The resulting feudal navigation network offers a novel approach with no RL, no graph, no odometry, and no metric map; all while achieving SOTA results on the image goal navigation task.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.09893 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Method Overview 1: A subset of trajectories of point-click and observation-image pairs are selected from the LAVN dataset Johnson et al. (2024) for learning a latent space for the memory proxy map and training WayNet. We test our method on a separate set of environments. 2: Images from these pairs are clustered based on feature similarity, and cluster members form positive pairs used for contrastively learning a lat… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Illustration of the memory proxy map (MPM) during navigation. Row 1: RGB observation [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** (Best viewed zoomed) We show qualitative results for the waypoints predicted by WayNet [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (1 more)

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: Distance matrices showing a heatmap of metric distances between each pair of images in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

[4]

Learning to map for active semantic goal navigation

Georgios Georgakis, Bernadette Bucher, Karl Schmeckpeper, Siddharth Singh, and Kostas Dani- ilidis. Learning to map for active semantic goal navigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.15648 ,

arXiv
[5]

Metric-Free Explo- ration for Topological Mapping by Task and Motion Imitation in Feature Space

Yuhang He, Irving Fang, Yiming Li, Rushi Bhavesh Shah, and Chen Feng. Metric-Free Explo- ration for Topological Mapping by Task and Motion Imitation in Feature Space. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.09192,

arXiv
[7]

Memory-augmented reinforcement learning for image- goal navigation

12 Lina Mezghan, Sainbayar Sukhbaatar, Thibaut Lavril, Oleksandr Maksymets, Dhruv Batra, Pi- otr Bojanowski, and Karteek Alahari. Memory-augmented reinforcement learning for image- goal navigation. In 2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 3316–3323. IEEE,

work page 2022
[8]

One-4-All: Neural Potential Fields for Em- bodied Navigation

Sacha Morin, Miguel Saavedra-Ruiz, and Liam Paull. One-4-All: Neural Potential Fields for Em- bodied Navigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.04011,

arXiv
[9]

Environment predictive coding for visual navigation

Santhosh Kumar Ramakrishnan and Tushar Nagarajan. Environment predictive coding for visual navigation. ICLR 2022,

work page 2022
[10]

Semi-parametric topological memory for navigation

Nikolay Savinov, Alexey Dosovitskiy, and Vladlen Koltun. Semi-parametric topological memory for navigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.00653,

arXiv
[11]

Maast: Map attention with semantic transformers for efficient visual navigation

Zachary Seymour, Kowshik Thopalli, Niluthpol Mithun, Han-Pang Chiu, Supun Samarasekera, and Rakesh Kumar. Maast: Map attention with semantic transformers for efficient visual navigation. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pp. 13223–13230. IEEE,

work page 2021
[12]

Ving: Learning open-world navigation with visual goals

Dhruv Shah, Benjamin Eysenbach, Gregory Kahn, Nicholas Rhinehart, and Sergey Levine. Ving: Learning open-world navigation with visual goals. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pp. 13215–13222. IEEE, 2021a. Dhruv Shah, Benjamin Eysenbach, Nicholas Rhinehart, and Sergey Levine. Rapid exploration for open-world navigati...

arXiv 2021

Show all 17 references

[13]

Zamir, Zhi-Yang He, Alexander Sax, Jitendra Malik, and Silvio Savarese

Fei Xia, Amir R. Zamir, Zhi-Yang He, Alexander Sax, Jitendra Malik, and Silvio Savarese. Gibson env: real-world perception for embodied agents. In Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), 2018 IEEE Conference on . IEEE,

2018
[14]

Hierarchical robot navigation in novel environments using rough 2-d maps

Chengguang Xu, Christopher Amato, and Lawson LS Wong. Hierarchical robot navigation in novel environments using rough 2-d maps. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.03665,

arXiv
[15]

Offline visual representation learning for em- bodied navigation

Karmesh Yadav, Ram Ramrakhya, Arjun Majumdar, Vincent-Pierre Berges, Sachit Kuhar, Dhruv Batra, Alexei Baevski, and Oleksandr Maksymets. Offline visual representation learning for em- bodied navigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.13226,

arXiv
[17]

Target-driven visual navigation in indoor scenes using deep reinforcement learning

Yuke Zhu, Roozbeh Mottaghi, Eric Kolve, Joseph J Lim, Abhinav Gupta, Li Fei-Fei, and Ali Farhadi. Target-driven visual navigation in indoor scenes using deep reinforcement learning. In 2017 IEEE international conference on robotics and automation (ICRA) , pp. 3357–3364. IEEE,

2017
[2018]

A Landmark-Aware Visual Navigation Dataset

Faith Johnson, Bryan Bo Cao, Kristin Dana, Shubham Jain, and Ashwin Ashok. A Landmark-Aware Visual Navigation Dataset. arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.14281,

arXiv
[2019]

Object goal navigation using goal-oriented semantic exploration.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33:4247–4258, 2020a

Devendra Singh Chaplot, Dhiraj Prakashchand Gandhi, Abhinav Gupta, and Russ R Salakhutdinov. Object goal navigation using goal-oriented semantic exploration.Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems, 33:4247–4258, 2020a. Devendra Singh Chaplot, Ruslan Salakhutdinov, Ab...

arXiv
[2020]

End-to-end (instance)-image goal navigation through correspondence as an emergent phe- nomenon

Guillaume Bono, Leonid Antsfeld, Boris Chidlovskii, Philippe Weinzaepfel, and Christian Wolf. End-to-end (instance)-image goal navigation through correspondence as an emergent phe- nomenon. arXiv preprint arXiv:2309.16634, 2023a. Guillaume Bono, Leonid Antsfeld, Assem Sadek, G...

arXiv
[2021]

Goat: Go to any thing

Matthew Chang, Theophile Gervet, Mukul Khanna, Sriram Yenamandra, Dhruv Shah, So Yeon Min, Kavit Shah, Chris Paxton, Saurabh Gupta, Dhruv Batra, et al. Goat: Go to any thing. arXiv preprint arXiv:2311.06430,

arXiv
[2023]

https://aihabitat.org/challenge/ 2023/,

2023

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [4]

Learning to map for active semantic goal navigation

Georgios Georgakis, Bernadette Bucher, Karl Schmeckpeper, Siddharth Singh, and Kostas Dani- ilidis. Learning to map for active semantic goal navigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2106.15648 ,

arXiv

[2] [5]

Metric-Free Explo- ration for Topological Mapping by Task and Motion Imitation in Feature Space

Yuhang He, Irving Fang, Yiming Li, Rushi Bhavesh Shah, and Chen Feng. Metric-Free Explo- ration for Topological Mapping by Task and Motion Imitation in Feature Space. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.09192,

arXiv

[3] [7]

Memory-augmented reinforcement learning for image- goal navigation

12 Lina Mezghan, Sainbayar Sukhbaatar, Thibaut Lavril, Oleksandr Maksymets, Dhruv Batra, Pi- otr Bojanowski, and Karteek Alahari. Memory-augmented reinforcement learning for image- goal navigation. In 2022 IEEE/RSJ International Conference on Intelligent Robots and Systems (IROS), pp. 3316–3323. IEEE,

work page 2022

[4] [8]

One-4-All: Neural Potential Fields for Em- bodied Navigation

Sacha Morin, Miguel Saavedra-Ruiz, and Liam Paull. One-4-All: Neural Potential Fields for Em- bodied Navigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.04011,

arXiv

[5] [9]

Environment predictive coding for visual navigation

Santhosh Kumar Ramakrishnan and Tushar Nagarajan. Environment predictive coding for visual navigation. ICLR 2022,

work page 2022

[6] [10]

Semi-parametric topological memory for navigation

Nikolay Savinov, Alexey Dosovitskiy, and Vladlen Koltun. Semi-parametric topological memory for navigation. arXiv preprint arXiv:1803.00653,

arXiv

[7] [11]

Maast: Map attention with semantic transformers for efficient visual navigation

Zachary Seymour, Kowshik Thopalli, Niluthpol Mithun, Han-Pang Chiu, Supun Samarasekera, and Rakesh Kumar. Maast: Map attention with semantic transformers for efficient visual navigation. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pp. 13223–13230. IEEE,

work page 2021

[8] [12]

Ving: Learning open-world navigation with visual goals

Dhruv Shah, Benjamin Eysenbach, Gregory Kahn, Nicholas Rhinehart, and Sergey Levine. Ving: Learning open-world navigation with visual goals. In 2021 IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation (ICRA) , pp. 13215–13222. IEEE, 2021a. Dhruv Shah, Benjamin Eysenbach, Nicholas Rhinehart, and Sergey Levine. Rapid exploration for open-world navigati...

arXiv 2021