Organizations: The Robotics Institute, School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University · School of Mechanical Engineering, Kyung Hee University · Department of Aerospace Engineering, Pennsylvania State University
Abstract
Standardized benchmarks have played a central role in advancing robot manipulation learning, yet most focus on ground-supported manipulation systems, which limits their applicability to dynamics-critical domains such as aerial manipulation (AM). AM presents distinct system-level challenges, including environmental disturbances, coupled dynamics between the manipulator and floating base, and constrained degrees of freedom. Consequently, task performance depends jointly on robot embodiment, low-level control, and high-level policy design. We introduce AM-Bench, a modular simulation suite and benchmark for multirotor-based AM policy learning. AM-Bench includes representative embodiments spanning underactuated, fully actuated, and overactuated systems, 12 tasks across contact, transport, and constrained interaction, configurable aerodynamic disturbances and actuator saturation, standard low-level controllers, and baseline policy-learning algorithms. Unlike prior manipulation benchmarks that primarily emphasize end-to-end policy performance, AM-Bench enables system-level evaluation of how embodiment, control, disturbances, and policy choices interact. We demonstrate its diagnostic value through three simulation studies spanning high-level policies, policy--control interfaces, and embodiments, together with real-world validation of modeled effects and a hardware test of the learning pipeline.
Real-world evaluation is a bottleneck in developing generalist robot manipulation policies. Each rollout requires physical hardware and an operator to set up, reset, and score it. We introduce ArmnetBench v0.1, a benchmark run on a fleet of low-cost SO-101 cells under light on-site supervision. v0.1 validates this arm farm end to end and compares 7 policies across 12 tasks with both single-arm and bimanual configurations. Each policy is trained or fine-tuned on 50 demonstrations per task; the benchmark contains 2,518 policy rollouts and 600 reference demonstrations. All 3,118 episodes carry a three-way label (successful, suboptimal, or failure). Policy rollouts are human-scored, while demonstrations are successful by construction. Beyond evaluation, its quality-labelled trajectories support downstream learning, from reward and predictive world models to policies trained on mixed-quality data. The leaderboard is an initial comparison under this shared budget. We release the 3,118 core episodes in LeRobot v3.0 and RoboMeter formats.
Generalist manipulation policies are increasingly presented as foundation models for robotic control, but their real-world generalization remains difficult to diagnose. A policy may succeed on demonstrated tasks while still failing to execute fine-grained atomic skills or recombine learned skills in new task structures. We introduce \textbf{ATOM-Bench}, a real-world benchmark for evaluating both atomic skills and compositional generalization in manipulation policies. ATOM-Bench factorizes tabletop manipulation into motor atoms and instruction atoms, and contains 30 atomic tasks and 24 held-out compositional tasks across paired single-arm and dual-arm robot tracks. We collect 3,000 human demonstrations for atomic fine-tuning and release both the demonstration data and evaluation rollout data to support reproducible real-world evaluation. Policies are fine-tuned on atomic tasks and evaluated on both atomic skill acquisition and held-out compositional tasks. We further introduce Atomic Score (AS) and Compositional Failure Share (CFS) to distinguish failures caused by weak atomic skills from failures caused by limited compositional reuse. Through 2,700 physical rollouts on five representative manipulation policies, we find that current policies can acquire simple instruction-grounding skills, but still struggle with fine-grained motor atoms, counting, and logical filtering. More importantly, strong atomic performance does not reliably transfer to held-out compositional tasks. ATOM-Bench provides a diagnostic testbed for studying whether failures arise from weak motor execution, poor instruction grounding, or limited compositional reuse.
We present EBench, a simulation benchmark that diagnoses generalist mobile manipulation policies beyond a single success-rate scalar. EBench comprises 26 diverse and challenging manipulation tasks annotated along 5 capability dimensions and 4 generalization dimensions. We evaluate state-of-the-art generalist manipulation models including π0, π0.5, XVLA, and InternVLA-A1, and reveal that the models exhibit strikingly different capability profiles: π0.5 achieves the highest test success rate, the best train--test retention, and the strongest mobile manipulation performance; π0 leads on dexterous fixed-base and high-precision tasks; XVLA and InternVLA-A1 exhibit complementary strengths across atomic skills and operating regimes. Beyond capability profiling, EBench analyzes the generalization ability from 4 representative perspectives, identifying the impact of different distribution shift factors. The results reveal strengths and weaknesses of models behind an overall score. We hope this benchmark offers a broad set of diagnostic signals to guide iteration on generalist manipulation models.