Cross-robot policy learning -- training a single policy to perform well across multiple embodiments -- remains a central challenge in robot learning. Transformer-based policies, such as vision-language-action (VLA) models, are typically embodiment-agnostic and must infer kinematic structure purely from observations, which can reduce robustness across embodiments and even limit performance within a single embodiment. We propose an embodiment-aware transformer policy that injects morphology via three mechanisms: (1) kinematic tokens that factorize actions across joints and compress time through per-joint temporal chunking; (2) a topology-aware attention bias that encodes kinematic topology as an inductive bias in self-attention, encouraging message passing along kinematic edges; and (3) joint-attribute conditioning that augments topology with per-joint descriptors to capture semantics beyond connectivity. Across a range of embodiments, this structured integration consistently improves performance over a vanilla pi0.5 VLA baseline, indicating improved robustness both within an embodiment and across embodiments.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Embedding robot morphology into a Transformer-based VLA policy : We embed kinematic topology and per-joint semantics into the action policy. This design consistently improves cross-robot policy learning.
Figure 2: Embodiment-aware Transformer Policy : Morphology is embedded via three mechanisms: (1) kinematic tokens; (2) topology-aware attention bias; and (3) joint-attribute conditioning.
Feature
Description
Example
type_pris
1 if prismatic joint, else 0
0
type_rev
1 if revolute joint, else 0
1
ax
Joint axis X component (unit vector)
0
ay
Joint axis Y component (unit vector)
0
az
Joint axis Z component (unit vector)
1
hard_lower
Hard lower limit [rad or m]
-2.9671
Table 1: Per-joint descriptors for joint-attribute conditioning : Each joint j is represented by a descriptor sj , which is used for FiLM-based conditioning of kinematic-token embeddings. The descriptor includes joint type indicators, axis direction, motion limits, and contact-related properties (log-transformed where indicated); the Example column shows a representative instance from the DROID (Franka Panda arm) embodiment.
Figure 3: Simulation environments for evaluation : All environments are evaluated language-conditioned pick-and-place manipulation.
Setting
Fine-tuning
Batch
Horizon
Steps
DROID (Panda)
AP-FT ( ∼ 450M)
32
16
100k
Unitree G1 Dex1
Full-FT ( ∼ 3.5B)
8
32
60k
DROID+SO101
AP-FT ( ∼ 450M)
32
16
125k
Table 2: Training protocol : Fine-tuning configurations and key hyperparameters for each benchmark. All runs start from pi05-base with a cosine learning-rate schedule. AP-FT updates only the action-policy components, whereas Full-FT updates the entire model.
Kinematic Token
Mask
FiLM
Success Rate (SR%) ↑ (95% CI)
(Chunk G =1)
Avg
Task 1
Task 2
Task 3
–
–
–
19.7 ± 4.5
18.3 ± 4.4
15.7 ± 4.1
25.0 ± 4.9
[0.6pt/2pt] ✓
–
–
36.0 ± 5.4
10.3 ± 3.6
67.7 ± 5.3
30.0 ± 5.2
✓
Full-Mask
–
30.1 ± 5.2
15.3 ± 4.1
34.0 ± 5.3
41.0 ± 5.5
✓
Mix-Mask
–
36.9 ± 5.4
27.7 ± 5.0
56.7 ± 5.6
26.3 ± 5.1
✓
Soft-Mask
–
26.1 ± 4.9
29.7 ± 5.1
17.3 ± 4.3
31.3 ± 5.2
Table 3: Single-embodiment results on DROID : We evaluate whether embedding robot morphology improves performance even under single-embodiment training on DROID (Franka Panda). Starting from the π0.5 baseline, we add kinematic tokens, topology-aware attention, and joint-attribute conditioning (FiLM), individually and in combination. Each component contributes to higher success rates, and the best performance is achieved by combining all three (KT + Mix-Mask + FiLM). Bold : best SR in each column (ties allowed). Underline : second-best. 95% CI is reported with ±Δ .
Kinematic Token
Mask
FiLM
Avg SR% ↑
(Chunk G =1)
(95% CI)
–
–
–
24.7 ± 4.9
[0.6pt/2pt] ✓
–
–
24.3 ± 4.9
✓
Full-Mask
–
23.8 ± 4.8
✓
Mix-Mask
–
27.3 ± 5.0
✓
–
✓
25.3 ± 4.9
Table 4: Single-embodiment results on Unitree G1 Dex1 : We evaluate our method on Unitree G1 Dex1 to test its benefit beyond DROID. A key difference is the 16-DoF joint-space action space. Overall, our components remain effective in this setting, and combining KT with Mix-Mask and FiLM achieves the best SR. Bold : best SR. Underline : second-best.
Figure 4: Multi-embodiment learning curves on Panda–SO101 : We jointly train a single policy on a mixed Panda (DROID) and SO101 dataset. We report Macro SR, defined as (SRPanda+SRSO101)/2 . Our full model outperforms the π0.5 baseline throughout training. For completeness, per-embodiment success rates are reported in the appendix F . Shaded regions indicate 95% confidence intervals.
Kinematic Tokens
Avg SR% ↑
Chunk ( G )
(95% CI)
1
36.0 ± 5.4
2
35.8 ± 5.4
4
34.4 ± 5.3
8
30.5 ± 5.2
16
33.3 ± 5.3
Table 5: Effect of temporal chunk size on DROID : We study how the temporal granularity of kinematic tokens affects performance. Using a single chunk ( G=1 ) achieves the best performance, while larger chunk sizes reduce performance. Bold : best SR. Underline : second-best.
Kinematic Tokens
Avg SR% ↑
Mask
AKT
(95% CI)
–
–
36.0 ± 5.4
–
✓
37.0 ± 5.4
Full-Mask
–
30.3 ± 5.2
Full-Mask
✓
33.0 ± 5.3
Mix-Mask
–
37.0 ± 5.4
Table 6: Effect of auxiliary kinematic tokens (AKT) on DROID : We study whether increasing per-joint token capacity improves performance. Adding AKT consistently improves performance, especially with Mix-Mask. Bold : best SR. Underline : second-best.
Bias Init
Avg SR% ↑ (95% CI)
Zero
26.1 ± 4.9
Hard
25.1 ± 4.9
Mix
28.1 ± 5.1
Linear
20.4 ± 4.5
Table 7: Effect of bias initialization on DROID : We study the effect of bias initialization in Soft-Mask attention (Zero, Hard, Mix, Linear). Overall, Mix achieves the best performance among Soft-Mask variants, yet all Soft-Mask variants remain below the masked variants in Table 3 . Bold : best. Underline : second-best.
Appendix figures & tables8 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Figure 5: Attention mask : Attention mask used in our VLA action policy with kinematic tokens. Dark cells indicate unmasked attention and light cells indicate masked attention. Tokens are grouped by type for visualization (image/prompt/action/kinematic; each group may contain multiple tokens). We append kinematic tokens and apply a topology-aware mask only in the joint-to-joint block to encode kinematic connectivity, while all other attention patterns follow the base π0.5 mask.
Figure 6: Verb distribution in the DROID 1/8 subset : Verb frequencies in task instructions.
Figure 7: Object distribution in the DROID 1/8 subset : Object frequencies in task instructions.
Reinforcement learning has enabled robust locomotion for legged robots, but learned policies are typically tied to a specific robot morphology and require additional engineering when the number of legs, actuators, or mechanical properties change. We present PolyMorph, a morphology-conditioned framework that learns a single locomotion policy for heterogeneous legged robots. PolyMorph converts each robot's URDF into joint-link modules and combines a recurrent encoder, graph-based Transformer, and per-joint decoder to generate actions across variable leg counts and joint configurations. To improve training stability, PolyMorph uses morphology-normalized rewards, adaptive robot sampling, and URDF-derived PD-gain initialization. We evaluate PolyMorph in simulation across bipedal, tripedal, and quadrupedal robots, including unseen morphology variants and platforms, and deploy the policy on real quadruped platforms operated in multiple configurations. The results show that a single PolyMorph policy generalizes across diverse robot morphologies without per-robot policy retraining.
The performance of learned robot visuomotor policies depends heavily on the size and quality of their training data, yet collecting high-quality demonstrations remains costly for robots in the real world. Although large-scale robot and human datasets are increasingly available, embodiment gaps and mismatched action spaces make them difficult to leverage directly. Cross-embodiment transfer, reusing experience from other embodiments to improve learning on a target embodiment, is therefore crucial for scaling robot learning beyond per-robot data collection. In this work, we find that efficient transfer can be achieved by learning from what is shared across embodiments, the visual dynamics of how the world responds to motion, and by effectively exploiting the scarce target-embodiment data at test time. The proposed framework, called Latent Policy Steering (LPS), implements an embodiment-agnostic pretraining phase, which trains an image-based World Model (WM) with optical flow across diverse embodiments. The resulting WM is finetuned on the target embodiment with robot actions. It then steers the base policy toward better actions by searching in the WM's latent space for plans that stay close to the finetuning data. LPS is a policy-agnostic framework: it can flexibly accommodate different policies without having to retrain them. In Robomimic and real-world evaluations, LPS improves the average performance of Diffusion Policy relatively by 16% and 62%, and Pi0.5 by 8% and 14%, with only 50 demonstrations on an unseen target embodiment.
Yiqi Wang, Mrinal Verghese, Jeff Schneider
Robotics Institute, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, 5000 Forbes Ave, Pittsburgh, United States
A robot description does more than specify a physical mechanism: it also encodes arbitrary conventions, such as joint-axis direction, joint-angle zero, and the order and names of links and joints. Morphology-aware policies consume interfaces built from these descriptions, yet cross-embodiment evaluation typically changes the robot while keeping those conventions fixed. This leaves a simple question unanswered: does behavior survive when the robot stays fixed but its description changes? GaugeBench isolates this case by rewriting a fixed mechanism under physically equivalent conventions, verifying that its physics and policy interface are preserved, and then evaluating the same policy weights. The result is stark: three MetaMorph policies score 4030.6 on 80 familiar robots, but only 51.6 when those same robots are equivalently re-described, while 98 genuinely held-out robots score 1489.6. A new description can therefore be more damaging than a new robot. Tracing the failure reveals that axis reversal alone reproduces the collapse, joint-angle zero changes are nearly harmless, and reordering lies between them; moreover, changing joint-state and torque coordinates alone is sufficient to cause the failure, while changing description-derived features alone is not. The same phenomenon appears in ModuMorph and an unrelated PyBullet framework. Yet it is not irreversible: exact two-description transport restores the original controller, and training across equivalent axis conventions raises retained return under axis reversal from 3.6% to 80.6%. Together, these results separate mechanism robustness from representation robustness and show that cross-embodiment evaluation should test both.
Rahath Malladi, Arshia Sangwan, Rajesh K. Gupta +1
University of California San Diego · New York University