When Does Language Matter? Multilingual Instructions Reveal Step-wise Language Sensitivity in Vision-Language-Action Models

Vision-Language-Action models have recently demonstrated promising capabilities in learning generalist robot policies from large-scale multimodal data. However, most existing VLA systems are trained and evaluated primarily with English instructions, leaving their ability to understand and execute instructions in other languages largely unexplored. While the underlying large language models often possess multilingual capabilities, it remains unclear whether these multilingual capabilities transfer to VLAs during training. In this work, we present the first systematic study of multilingual instruction following in VLA models. We first construct multilingual instructions by extending existing benchmarks with translations of their instructions. Using these instructions, we evaluate several representative VLA models across a range of tasks in simulation settings. Our experiments reveal a significant multilingual gap: models trained primarily on English instructions exhibit substantial performance degradation when evaluated on other languages, even when the underlying language backbone is multilingual. We provide several findings and analyses to understand the multilingual gap. Cross-lingual transfer behavior analysis shows that performance drops correlate with both instruction understanding and action execution. Representation analyses suggest that multilingual instruction-caused representation shifts may contribute to the multilingual gap. Motivated by these findings, we further explore strategies to improve multilingual performance in VLAs. We propose a simple yet effective multilingual fine-tuning approach, Multilingual Principal Component Alignment, which leverages Principal Component Analysis to get the principal component subspace and align projected multilingual representations, effectively reducing the multilingual performance gap.

Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models enable robots to perform manipulation tasks directly from natural language instructions and are increasingly viewed as a foundation for generalist robotic policies. However, their reliability under Out-of-Distribution (OOD) instructions remains underexplored. In this paper, we reveal a critical failure mode in which VLA policies continue executing visually plausible actions even when the language instruction contradicts the scene. We refer to this phenomenon as linguistic blindness, where VLA policies prioritize visual priors over instruction semantics during action generation. To systematically analyze this issue, we introduce ICBench, a diagnostic benchmark constructed from the LIBERO dataset that probes language-action coupling by injecting controlled OOD instruction contradictions while keeping the visual environment unchanged. Evaluations on three representative VLA architectures, including Pi0, Pi0.5 and OpenVLA OFT, show that these models frequently succeed at tasks despite logically impossible instructions, revealing a strong visual bias in action generation. To mitigate this issue, we propose Instruction-Guided Attention Recalibration (IGAR), a train-free inference-time mechanism that rebalances attention distributions to restore the influence of language instructions. IGAR operates without retraining or architectural modification and can be directly applied to existing VLA models. Experiments across 30 LIBERO tasks demonstrate that IGAR substantially reduces erroneous execution under OOD contradictory instructions while preserving baseline task performance. We additionally validate the approach on a real Franka robotic arm, where IGAR effectively prevents manipulation triggered by inconsistent instructions.

Vision-Language-Action models (VLAs) promise to ground language instructions in robot control, yet in practice often fail to faithfully follow language. When presented with instructions that lack strong scene-specific supervision, VLAs suffer from counterfactual failures: they act based on vision shortcuts induced by dataset biases, repeatedly executing well-learned behaviors and selecting objects frequently seen during training regardless of language intent. To systematically study it, we introduce LIBERO-CF, the first counterfactual benchmark for VLAs that evaluates language following capability by assigning alternative instructions under visually plausible LIBERO layouts. Our evaluation reveals that counterfactual failures are prevalent yet underexplored across state-of-the-art VLAs. We propose Counterfactual Action Guidance (CAG), a simple yet effective dual-branch inference scheme that explicitly regularizes language conditioning in VLAs. CAG combines a standard VLA policy with a language-unconditioned Vision-Action (VA) module, enabling counterfactual comparison during action selection. This design reduces reliance on visual shortcuts, improves robustness on under-observed tasks, and requires neither additional demonstrations nor modifications to existing architectures or pretrained models. Extensive experiments demonstrate its plug-and-play integration across diverse VLAs and consistent improvements. For example, on LIBERO-CF, CAG improves $π_{0.5}$ by 9.7% in language following accuracy and 3.6% in task success on under-observed tasks using a training-free strategy, with further gains of 15.5% and 8.5%, respectively, when paired with a VA model. In real-world evaluations, CAG reduces counterfactual failures of 9.4% and improves task success by 17.2% on average.