FLARE: A Failure-Aware Framework for Autonomous Correction and Recovery in Visual-Language Robotic Manipulation
Authors: Ganlong Zhao, Zijia Tang, Xingping Chen, Zhanghui Kuang, Ye Tian, Guanbin Li
Organizations: The Chinese University of Hong Kong · Centre for Perceptual and Interactive Intelligence · Duke University · Sun Yat-sen University · TengenX · Tencent Robotics X · Shenzhen Loop Area Institute · Guangdong Key Laboratory of Big Data Analysis and Processing
Vision-Language-Action Models~(VLAs) have demonstrated significant promise in generalizing to complex, long-horizon robotic manipulation tasks. However, their performance remains brittle, as they are typically trained on trajectory-monotonic, failure-free demonstrations. This reliance on perfect" data leaves them unable to recover from common execution errors, such as a missed grasp, a dropped object, or an unexpected collision. In this paper, we propose FLARE, a novel framework that endows VLAs with robust error recovery capabilities through a Retry" and Reset" paradigm. First, we introduce a Retry" mechanism by injecting perturbation and bridging segments that decouple robot pose from environment state into demonstrations, enabling the policy to autonomously handle execution deviations. Second, to address critical, state-breaking (OOD) failures, we introduce a Reset" pipeline. We leverage an MLLM for offline failure analysis to automatically identify OOD states from execution videos. This analysis enables the efficient, targeted collection of a small library of object-centric Reset" skills, which are trained to restore the environment to a task-valid state. Our full framework integrates these learned policies. At inference, an online MLLM monitor arbitrates between task execution and ``Reset" skills. Experiments on challenging, contact-rich manipulation tasks show our approach significantly improves task success and robustness.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: FLARE: Failure-Aware Resilience in VLA. Previous methods are brittle, failing from minor perturbations (ID errors) or catastrophic states (OOD errors), and do not leverage the VLA’s inherent generative capability for continuous self-correction. Our FLARE framework introduces an ID/OOD error taxonomy to guide a dual Retry/Reset paradigm. We tackle ID errors via built-in Retry robustness and resolve OOD errors with MLLM-bootstrapped Reset skills, achieving robust, resilient autonomy.
Figure 2: The overall framework of our method. We first collect the failure data with the VLA model trained with regular demonstrations. Then we perform the failure analysis with MLLM and formulate the failures with ID/OOD taxonomy. For ID errors, we perform the perturbation & bridging augmentation to enhance the robustness and “retry” ability of VLA models. For OOD errors, we collect the object-centric reset skill data. All these data are utilized to obtained a skill bank for further close-loop inference.
Methods
Coffee_D0
Coffee_D1
Stack_D0
Stack_D1
StackThree_D0
StackThree_D1
Threading_D0
ThreePiece Assembly_D0
ThreePiece Assembly_D1
Mean
OpenVLA [ 18 ]
42%
18%
84%
86%
36%
20%
20%
28%
8%
38.0%
Task-conditioned
66%
24%
88%
68%
30%
6%
74%
20%
0%
41.8%
Subgoal-conditioned
76%
26%
88%
74%
24%
6%
78%
20%
2%
43.8%
Motion-conditioned
68%
32%
92%
84%
38%
16%
58%
30%
4%
46.9%
Subgoal Self-reflection
80%
32%
88%
78%
32%
6%
80%
34%
2%
48.0%
Phoenix [ 38 ]
94%
48%
96%
86%
50%
20%
68%
52%
6%
57.8%
Table 1: Comparison of experimental results across 9 manipulation tasks in RoboMimic Simulation. The ‘D’ suffix in the task names denotes the range of object randomization in scene initialization. The results demonstrate that our failure-aware VLA framework for robust robotic manipulation achieves better performance than all previous methods as well as the strong VLA baselines. Phoenix-Human is gray as it involves human instruction as the self-reflection subgoal.
Real-World Task (40 trials)
π0.5 (Baseline)
Ours (FLARE)
Stack Three Blocks
62.5%
75.0%
Insert U-shaped Block
45.0%
55.0%
Table 2: Success rates of real-world manipulation tasks. Our method outperforms the baseline in two challenging settings.
Figure 3: Real-world experimental setup and execution trajectories. Top: The “Stack Three Blocks” task. Bottom: The “Insert U-shaped Block” task.
Figure 4: The sensitivity of two hyper-parameters, rotation r and translation t for perturbation & bridging. Our method achieves best performance when r=30∘ and t=0.7 , respectively.
Figure 5: The failure case for Coffee and ThreePieceAssembly respectively. (a) Reset coffee pod; (b) Reset coffee machine lid; (c) Reset the T-shaped block; (d) Reset the U-shaped block.
Methods
Coffee_D0
Coffee_D1
ThreePiece Assembly_D0
ThreePiece Assembly_D1
Ours w/o Reset
92%
74%
60%
54%
Ours Reset-Only
88%
64%
60%
50%
Ours
96%
78%
62%
58%
Ours-Oracle
100%
90%
68%
64%
Table 3: The performance comparison for our method and two variants, Ours w/o Reset and Ours-Oracle. Ours w/o Reset only applies the perturbation & bridging strategy for VLA model training, and Ours-Oracle replaces the generated instruction for object reset with human feedback. The experimental results demonstrate the effectiveness of our reset skill learning and error correction.
Reset Skill Success Rate
Generation Efficiency
Task
Coffee
ThreePiece Assembly
Coffee
ThreePiece Assembly
Reset Object 1
84%
88%
83.7%
48.6%
Reset Object 2
24%
20%
11.6%
5.9%
Table 4: The reset skill success rate and demonstration generation efficiency on two manipulation tasks. The Reset Object 1 is coffee machine lid/T-shaped block, and the reset object 2 is coffee pod/U-shaped block for Coffee/ThreePieceAssembly. Our method successfully generates demonstrations and trains useful VLA models that can reset the objects when errors occur.
Task
Reset/Retry
Reset Object
Timestamp
Coffee
88%
88%
78%
ThreePiece Assembly
96%
78%
66%
Table 5: The performance of failure case indentification of Gemini-2.5-Pro on three tasks: Reset/Retry classification, Reset object identification and Timestamp identification for Coffee and ThreePieceAssembly. The effective failure analysis provides high-quality reset dataset for further demonstration collection.
Figure 6: Failure cases for all tasks (stack task excluded as reset is not applicable). (a) Reset coffee pod; (b) Reset coffee machine lid; (c) Reset the needle-hole block; (d) Reset the T-shaped block; (e) Reset the U-shaped block; (f) Reset the blue block.
Figure 7: Visualization of a successful task execution for ThreePieceAssembly. Frame 1-4: The robot operates the regular task to assembly the three pieces by first pick-and-place the T-shaped block. Frame 5-8: The T-shaped block is not place appropriately and robot tries to reset it. Frame 9-16: The robot executes the regular task again and succeeds.
Table 6: The main prompt used in our experiment for video analysis.
Table 7: The main prompt used in our experiment for failure case detection during the closed-loop inference for ThreePieceAssembly.
Recent advances in robotic manipulation have integrated low-level robotic control into Vision-Language Models (VLMs), extending them into Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models. Although state-of-the-art VLAs achieve strong performance in downstream robotic applications, supported by large-scale crowd-sourced robot training data, they still inevitably encounter failures during execution. Enabling robots to reason and recover from unpredictable and abrupt failures remains a critical challenge. Existing robotic manipulation datasets, collected in either simulation or the real world, primarily provide only ground-truth trajectories, leaving robots unable to recover once failures occur. Moreover, the few datasets that address failure detection typically offer only textual explanations, which are difficult to utilize directly in VLA models. To address this gap, we introduce FailSafe, a novel failure generation and recovery system that automatically produces diverse failure cases paired with executable recovery actions. FailSafe can be easily adapted to a wide range of manipulation tasks in simulators with motion planning support, enabling scalable creation of failure-action data. To demonstrate its effectiveness, we fine-tune LLaVA-OneVision-7B (LLaVA-OV-7B) to build FailSafe-VLM. Experimental results show that FailSafe-VLM successfully helps robotic arms detect and recover from potential failures, improving the performance of three state-of-the-art VLA models (Pi-0-FAST, OpenVLA, OpenVLA-OFT) by up to 22.6% on average across several tasks in ManiSkill. Furthermore, FailSafe-VLM could generalize across different spatial configurations, camera viewpoints, object and robotic embodiments.
Zijun Lin, Jiafei Duan, Haoquan Fang +4
1Nanyang Technological University · Centre for Frontier AI Research, A*STAR · 3Allen Institute for AI +1
Vision-Language-Action (VLA) policies achieve strong performance in robotic manipulation but remain brittle once execution deviates from nominal trajectories. We propose CARE (Corrective Atomic Robotic Execution), a framework that improves recovery by learning from failures encountered during execution. Instead of generating corrective data from manually designed or random perturbations, CARE collects failed rollouts, models stage-conditioned post-failure deviations, and uses the resulting empirical distributions to synthesize representative failure states and corrective demonstrations. At inference time, CARE combines stage-wise planning with physically grounded 3D monitoring to trigger atomic adjustments or re-operations while preserving task progress. We further introduce the Failure State Recovery Benchmark (FSR-Bench), which evaluates recovery from intermediate failure states under local deviations and structural anomalies. Experiments across multiple VLA backbones, simulation benchmarks, and real-world dual-arm tasks show consistent improvements, with average task-success gains of 14.5 points in simulation and 15.9 points in the real world. Code, models, and data are available at https://github.com/xiaojunlan/care
Vision-Language-Action (VLA) models remain brittle in long-horizon, contact-rich manipulation because success-only imitation provides little supervision for execution drift, while failed rollouts are often discarded. We introduce RePO-VLA, a recovery-driven policy optimization framework that assigns distinct roles to success, recovery, and failure trajectories. RePO-VLA first applies Recovery-Aware Initialization (RAI), slicing recovery segments and resetting history so corrective actions depend on the current adverse state rather than the preceding failure. It then learns a Progress-Aware Semantic Value Function (PAS-VF), aligning spatiotemporal trajectory features with instructions and successful references. The resulting labels salvage useful failure prefixes via reliability decay, while low-value labels mark drift and terminal breakdowns, teaching differences among nominal, failed, and corrective actions. The data engine turns adverse states into planner-generated or human-collected corrective rollouts, teaching recovery to the success manifold. Value-Conditioned Refinement (VCR) trains the policy to prefer high-progress actions. At deployment, a fixed high value (v=1.0) biases actions toward the learned success manifold without online failure detectors or heuristic retries. We introduce FRBench, with standardized error injection and recovery-focused evaluation. Across simulated and real-world bimanual tasks, RePO-VLA improves robustness, raising adversarial success from 20% to 75% on average and up to 80% in scaled real-world trials.
Weijia Liufu, Xiaoyu Guo, Ruiyi Chen +16
1Sun Yat-sen University · 2South China University of Technology · 3Peng Cheng Laboratory +3