Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Excited to introduce SOLE-R1, a video-language reasoning model for zero-shot reward prediction for robot manipulation tasks! SOLE-R1 reasoning can serve as the SOLE signal for learning new tasks (completely from scratch) through online RL - i.e., robots start with random actions and learn previously unseen tasks guided only by...

18,957 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 7

Фото профиля Philip Schroeder
Philip Schroeder3 месяцев назад

(2/6) Given a natural-language goal and a video stream of observations, SOLE-R1 produces (i) per-timestep chain-of-thought reasoning about what has changed since the last timestep and (ii) a dense scalar progress estimate used as a reward for online RL. Attached video shows examples of SOLE-R1 zero-shot reward prediction for the RoboSuite pick cube task (both successful and failed trajectories).

Фото профиля Philip Schroeder
Philip Schroeder3 месяцев назад

(3/6) SOLE-R1 outperforms strong baselines (e.g., Robometer, RoboReward, TOPReward, GPT-5, Gemini-3-Pro) on zero-shot reward prediction for online RL. Baselines show greater vulnerability to reward hacking - i.e., the policy tricks the reward model into predicting high rewards without actually doing the task. Example videos below of baselines frequently over-estimating progress on failed trajectories.

Фото профиля Philip Schroeder
Philip Schroeder3 месяцев назад

(4/6) Training data: We build the SOLE-R1 training data in two stages: (1) foundational reasoning over space (single-image + depth) and time (multi-image/video), and (2) robot-video spatiotemporal reasoning specialized for dense progress estimation. For (1), we carefully curate a diverse collection of general spatial and multi-frame temporal reasoning data (e.g., from SSR-CoT, SpatialVLM, Spot-the-diff, Embodied CoT, RoboVQA, Robo2VLM-Reasoning) to serve as a foundational layer of our training mixture. For (2), we generate over 1 million chain-of-thought reasoning and ground-truth progress prediction examples from more than 40,000 real-world and simulated videos containing both successful and failed trajectories. Training recipe: Given this data, SOLE-R1 is trained with a two-stage hybrid recipe: (i) SFT to develop high-quality spatiotemporal CoT reasoning across the full training dataset, (ii) RLVR (GRPO) to further develop accurate progress prediction, boosted by the strong CoT reasoning developed during SFT

Фото профиля Philip Schroeder
Philip Schroeder3 месяцев назад

(5/6) Evaluation setting: We evaluate whether SOLE-R1 can serve as the SOLE supervision signal for learning manipulation skills from scratch via online RL. We run experiments across 4 sim benchmark suites (LIBERO, ManiSkill, Meta-World, and RoboSuite) and in a real-world tabletop manipulation setting with a Franka arm. Across all settings, we evaluate a total of 40 tasks, spanning pick-and-place, articulation, button/lever/knob interactions, and mobile manipulation. Results: SOLE-R1 achieves ≥50% success rate on 24 tasks, substantially outperforming all baselines. The strongest baselines include GPT-5 and Gemini, but they reach 50% success on only 7 and 5 tasks, respectively. The non-reasoning models achieve near-zero success on all tasks, with the exception of Meta-World tasks, where Robometer, RoboReward, and ReWiND achieve above 40% success rate on 4 tasks.

Фото профиля Philip Schroeder
Philip Schroeder3 месяцев назад

(6/6) 🌐 Website: 📄 Paper: 👩🏻‍💻 Code: Thank you to my co-authors: @thomas_weng, Karl Schmeckpeper, @_ericrosen, Stephen Hart And special thanks to @BizaOndrej for supervising this work from the very start! More to come soon!

Фото профиля ap_square
ap_square7 дней назад

Really interesting work. How well does SOLE-R1 handle failure cases where the visual signal is ambiguous - does the reward model ever confidently guide the robot in the wrong direction?

Фото профиля Aryan Dhawan
Aryan Dhawan1 месяц назад

Open source is great, mind if I test on my robot?

Похожие видео

New Course: Reinforcement Fine-Tuning LLMs with GRPO! Learn to use reinforcement learning to improve your LLM performance in this short course, built in collaboration with Predibase by Rubrik, and taught by Travis Addair, its Co-Founder and CTO, and Arnav Garg, its Senior Engineer and Machine Learning Lead. Reasoning models have been one of the most important developments in LLMs. Reinforcement Fine-Tuning (RFT) uses rewards to encourage LLMs to find solutions to multi-step reasoning tasks such as solving math problems and debugging code - without needing pre-existing training examples like in traditional supervised fine-tuning. Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) is a reinforcement fine-tuning algorithm gaining rapid adoption. Developed by the DeepSeek team and used to train the R1 reasoning model, GRPO uses reward functions that you can write in Python to assign rewards to model responses. It’s beneficial for tasks with verifiable outcomes and can work well even with fewer than 100 training examples. It can also significantly improve the reasoning ability of smaller LLMs, making applications faster and more cost effective. In this course, you’ll take a technical deep dive into RFT with GRPO. You’ll learn to build reward functions that you can use in the GRPO training process to guide an LLM toward better performance on multi-step reasoning tasks. In detail, you’ll: - Learn when reinforcement fine-tuning is a better fit than supervised fine-tuning, especially for tasks involving multi-step reasoning or limited labeled data. - Understand how GRPO uses programmable reward functions as a more scalable alternative to the human feedback required for other reinforcement learning algorithms, such as RLHF and DPO. - Frame the Wordle game as a reinforcement fine-tuning problem and see how an LLM can learn to plan, analyze feedback, and improve its strategy over time. - Design reward functions that power the reinforcement fine-tuning process. - Learn techniques for evaluating more subjective tasks, such as rating the quality of a text summary, using an LLM as a judge. - Understand why reward hacking happens and how to avoid it by adding penalty functions to discourage undesirable behaviors. - Learn the four key components of the loss calculation in the GRPO algorithm: token probability distribution ratios, advantages, clipping, and KL-divergence. - Launch reinforcement fine-tuning jobs using Predibase’s hosted training services. By the end of this course, you’ll be able to build and fine-tune LLMs using reinforcement learning to improve reasoning without relying on large labeled datasets or subjective human feedback. Please sign up here:

Andrew Ng

86,697 просмотров • 1 год назад

The power of the Claw, in the palm of a robot hand. Agentic robotics is here! Today, we open-source CaP-X: vibe agents, alive in the physical world. They incarnate as robot arms and humanoids with a rich set of perception APIs, actuation APIs, and auto synthesize skill libraries as they go. CaP-X is a strict superset of our old stack, because policies like VLAs are “just” API calls as well. It solves many tasks zero-shot that a learned policy would struggle with. And we are doing much more than vibing. CaP-X is our most systematic, scientific study on agentic robotics so far: - We build a comprehensive agentic toolkit: perception (SAM3 segmentation, Molmo pointing, depth, point cloud), control (IK solvers, grasp planner, navigation), and visualization (EEF, mask overlays) that work across different robots. - CaP-Gym: LLM’s first Physical Exam! 187 manipulation tasks across RoboSuite, LIBERO-PRO, and BEHAVIOR. Tabletop, bimanual, mobile manipulation. Sim and real. Can’t wait to see the gradients flow from CaP-Gym to the next wave of frontier LLM releases. - CaP-Bench: we benchmark 12 frontier LLMs/VLMs (Gemini, GPT, Opus, Qwen, DeepSeek, Kimi, and more) across 8 evaluation tiers. We systematically vary API abstraction level, agentic harness, and visual grounding methods. Lots of insights in our paper. - CaP-Agent0: a training-free agentic harness that matches or exceeds human expert code on 4 out of 7 tasks without task-specific tuning. - CaP-RL: if you get a gym, you get RL ;). A 7B OSS model jumps from 20% to 72% success after only 50 training iterations. The synthesized programs transfer to real robots with minimal sim-to-real gap. 3 years ago, our team created Voyager, one of the earliest agentic AI that plays and learns in Minecraft continuously. Its key ideas — skill libraries, self-reflection loops, and in-context planning — have since influenced many modern agentic designs. Today, the agent graduates from Minecraft and gets a real job. It’s April Fool’s, but this Claw is getting its hands dirty for real! Link in thread:

Jim Fan

81,638 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🔥 JUST IN: Open-source robotics dataset from 100% real-world scenarios! 🤯 Chinese robotics company AGIBOT just released AGIBOT WORLD 2026, an open-source dataset systematically covering key embodied AI research directions. Built entirely from real-world environments: commercial spaces, and homes. Collected using AGIBOT G2 robots in free-form collection mode, providing structured, accurately annotated, high-quality data. Digital twin technology creates 1:1 scale replicas in simulation matching the real environments. Both real-world and simulation data are open-sourced. The AGIBOT G2 platform collects multiple data types simultaneously: RGB(D) cameras, tactile sensors, force sensors, LiDAR, IMU, and full-body joint states. Whole-body control coordinates arms, waist, and hands for complex tasks. First-person teleoperation lets operators control the robot from its perspective. The tasks covered are fine-grained manipulation, ultra-long-horizon tasks, spatial navigation, dual-arm coordination, and multi-agent/human-robot collaboration. The dataset includes error-recovery trajectories with annotations. Most datasets only show successful demonstrations. AGIBOT includes failures and how the robot recovers, teaching models how to handle mistakes. After collection, data is tested through policy training and real-robot deployment to ensure quality. Then processed through industrial quality control with multiple screening and cleaning rounds. Making it open-source accelerates embodied AI research by giving researchers access to high-quality real-world robot data at scale. 🇨🇳 Learn more here: ~~ ♻️ Join the weekly robotics newsletter, and never miss any news →

Lukas Ziegler

40,583 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

We benchmarked leading multimodal foundation models (GPT-4o, Claude 3.5 Sonnet, Gemini, Llama, etc.) on standard computer vision tasks—from segmentation to surface normal estimation—using standard datasets like COCO and ImageNet. These models have made remarkable progress; however, it is unclear exactly where they stand in terms of understanding vision in detail. Especially when it comes to tasks beyond question-answering. How well do they understand an object's segments or geometry? Our analyses yield an assessment that is quantitatively and qualitatively detailed and is compatible with evaluations developed in the field of computer vision over the past decades. Observed trends: 🔹 The foundation models consistently underperform task-specific SOTA models across all tasks. However, they are respectable generalists, which is remarkable as they are presumably trained primarily on image-text-based tasks. 🔹 They perform semantic tasks notably better than geometric ones. 🔹 GPT-4o performs the best among non-reasoning models, getting the top position in 4 out of 6 tasks. 🔹 Reasoning models, e.g., o3, show improvements in geometric tasks. 🔹 The 'image generation' models, e.g., GPT-40 Image Generation, which have been natively trained multimodally, exhibit quirks. E.g., hallucinated objects, misalignment between the input and output, etc. 🔹 While the prompting techniques affect performance, better models exhibit less sensitivity to variations in prompts. We control for the variance introduced by the prompting methods in our experiments. 🌐 Detailed analyses, visualizations: ⌨️ code: 🧵 1/n

Amir Zamir

73,244 просмотров • 1 год назад

3D-LLM: Injecting the 3D World into Large Language Models paper page: Large language models (LLMs) and Vision-Language Models (VLMs) have been proven to excel at multiple tasks, such as commonsense reasoning. Powerful as these models can be, they are not grounded in the 3D physical world, which involves richer concepts such as spatial relationships, affordances, physics, layout, and so on. In this work, we propose to inject the 3D world into large language models and introduce a whole new family of 3D-LLMs. Specifically, 3D-LLMs can take 3D point clouds and their features as input and perform a diverse set of 3D-related tasks, including captioning, dense captioning, 3D question answering, task decomposition, 3D grounding, 3D-assisted dialog, navigation, and so on. Using three types of prompting mechanisms that we design, we are able to collect over 300k 3D-language data covering these tasks. To efficiently train 3D-LLMs, we first utilize a 3D feature extractor that obtains 3D features from rendered multi- view images. Then, we use 2D VLMs as our backbones to train our 3D-LLMs. By introducing a 3D localization mechanism, 3D-LLMs can better capture 3D spatial information. Experiments on ScanQA show that our model outperforms state-of-the-art baselines by a large margin (e.g., the BLEU-1 score surpasses state-of-the-art score by 9%). Furthermore, experiments on our held-in datasets for 3D captioning, task composition, and 3D-assisted dialogue show that our model outperforms 2D VLMs. Qualitative examples also show that our model could perform more tasks beyond the scope of existing LLMs and VLMs.

AK

249,798 просмотров • 3 лет назад

Today, we're joined by Nikita Rudin, co-founder and CEO of Flexion to discuss the gap between current robotic capabilities and what’s required to deploy fully autonomous robots in the real world. Nikita explains how reinforcement learning and simulation have driven rapid progress in robot locomotion—and why locomotion is still far from “solved.” We dig into the sim2real gap, and how adding visual inputs introduces noise and significantly complicates sim-to-real transfer. We also explore the debate between end-to-end models and modular approaches, and why separating locomotion, planning, and semantics remains a pragmatic approach today. Nikita also introduces the concept of "real-to-sim", which uses real-world data to refine simulation parameters for higher fidelity training, discusses how reinforcement learning, imitation learning, and teleoperation data are combined to train robust policies for both quadruped and humanoid robots, and introduces Flexion's hierarchical approach that utilizes pre-trained Vision-Language Models (VLMs) for high-level task orchestration with Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models and low-level whole-body trackers. Finally, Nikita shares the behind-the-scenes in humanoid robot demos, his take on reinforcement learning in simulation versus the real world, the nuances of reward tuning, and offers practical advice for researchers and practitioners looking to get started in robotics today. 🗒️ For the full list of resources for this episode, visit the show notes page: 📖 CHAPTERS =============================== 00:00 - Introduction 04:07 - Is robot locomotion solved? 06:04 - Sim-to-real gap 08:58 - Adding semantics to policies 09:42 - Modular vs end-to-end architectures 10:29 - Planner model 12:21 - Adapting RL techniques from quadrupeds to humanoids 15:39 - Behind robot demos 18:09 - Humanoid robots in home environments 22:03 - Training approach 23:56 - VLA models 27:59 - Closing the sim-to-real gap 32:55 - Task orchestration using VLMs 36:38 - Tool use 38:10 - Model hierarchy 43:37 - Simulator versus simulation environment 44:57 - Combining imitation learning and reinforcement learning 46:42 - RL in real world versus RL in simulation 52:58 - Reward tuning and value functions in robotics 56:38 - Predictions 1:00:10 - Humanoids, quadropeds, and wheeled platforms 1:02:45 - Advice, recommended robot kits, and community pla

The TWIML AI Podcast

22,592 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

A team tested Pi0, Pi0 Fast, Gr00t, and ACT on real robot arms in manufacturing tasks. (🔖 Bookmark this for later!) The task was precise: place thin rectangular frames from a messy stack into a holder. The team fine-tuned each model on 100 real trajectories and compared training time, inference speed, motion quality, and success rates. ⬇️ Here’s a breakdown of what they found Pi0 (Original) ✅ Strongest overall performance in precise pick-and-place ✅ High success rate even in edge cases ✅ Longest training time (~11 hours, ~$30 per run) ✅ Inference time of 80 ms causes short pauses between actions Despite delays, it handles complex scenarios well… solid for high-precision tasks, but slow to train. Gr00t ✅ Trains fast (~2 hours, ~$5 per run) ✅ Performs almost as well as Pi0 on large-object tasks ✅ Struggles with fine precision; random movement in some trials ✅ More training didn’t fix jitter or random offsets Best suited for tasks where exact precision isn’t critical. Not ready for manufacturing-grade accuracy without more tuning. Pi0 Fast ✅ Promised faster training, but results were underwhelming ✅ Training at 6 hours still showed low success rates ✅ Inference was slower than expected ✅ Not reliable for generalizing even slightly new tasks Currently too unstable for real-world deployment. Doesn’t live up to the “Fast” name yet. ACT (Baseline) ✅ 200MB model—lightweight, but limited ✅ Struggles with stacked objects or ambiguous scenes ✅ Success rates around 70% in best-case setups ✅ Can’t match newer models on precision or generalization Still a solid baseline, but clearly a generation behind in robustness. 🚨 Extra Notes All newer models share a common issue: •Inference takes longer than a frame (80 ms vs 33 ms), so robots “pause” between chunks. •This results in jittery movements, but not a dealbreaker unless tasks are time-sensitive. Language-conditioned tasks also fell short: after training on two labeled tasks, the model couldn’t generalize to a third unseen combination using only text prompts. ✅ The good news? These models adapt well to new robot arms with quick fine-tuning. ❌ The bad news? There’s still no plug-and-play solution for improving performance after deployment. Reinforcement learning or DAgger-style data collection during real-world operation may be the next big step, something many teams in robotics are actively working on.

Ilir Aliu

21,844 просмотров • 1 год назад