TimelyDAgger: Timing-Aware Expert Querying for VLA Policy Improvement
Authors: Zhixuan Zhao, Peiyan Li, Enhao Zhang, Yueran Tao, Hao Wang, Chenghao Yue, Lei Lv, Wentao Zhao, +5 more
Organizations: Tsinghua University · SEEN·E Robotics · Imperial College London · Dalian University of Technology · Tongji University · Peking University
DAgger improves robot policies by aggregating expert supervision from states visited during policy execution. Robot-gated DAgger automates expert queries, allowing the robot to decide when to request expert takeover. While existing gates emphasize detecting the need for assistance, takeover timing also shapes the content of these demonstrations and their value for policy learning. We propose TimelyDAgger, combining Bridge-PCA monitoring of internal vision-language-action (VLA) features with Feedback-guided Threshold Adaptation based on expert behavior to improve takeover timing. We introduce an evaluation framework linking failure detection, takeover timing, and policy improvement, including Target-Aligned Supervision Ratio (TASR) for assessing supervision quality without retraining. Experiments show that takeover timing affects policy learning, with TimelyDAgger achieving competitive failure detection and higher post-training success in most evaluated settings under matched expert-action budgets. Project website: https://seen-e.github.io/TimelyDagger/.
Figures & tables
Fig. 1: (A) Robot-gated DAgger. The robot requests expert assistance and uses the resulting demonstrations to update its policy. (B) Takeover timing affects policy improvement. Early takeover can collect redundant behavior, while late takeover may miss part of the behavior the policy needs to learn. Timely takeover concentrates supervision on the target behavior, supporting more effective policy learning.
Fig. 2: Overview of TimelyDAgger. (a) Offline construction: Bridge-PCA fits a principal subspace to ID bridge features and calibrates an initial takeover threshold. (b) Online collection: Bridge-PCA monitors policy execution and requests expert takeover, while FTA uses intervention feedback to adjust the threshold for better timing in subsequent episodes. (c) Policy update: The collected expert suffixes are combined with the original ID demonstrations to fine-tune the policy.
Fig. 3: Comparison of alarm timing across monitoring locations. A larger proportion of bridge alarms falls within the shaded preferred takeover window than is observed for input and action alarm, indicating closer alignment with the desired intervention timing.
Fig. 4: Bridge-feature geometry. Gray points denote ID reference features; blue and orange points denote features from successful and failed policy executions. The dark line illustrates the fitted PCA subspace in the visualization. The separation relative to this reference motivates the residual used by Bridge-PCA.
Fig. 5: ID-to-OOD task design. (a) Representative position, pose, and object variations across tasks. (b) Variations affecting different stages of OpenDrawer: handle position for opening, object pose for grasping, and target position for placement. Each pair contrasts the ID configuration with its corresponding OOD variation.
VLA
Task
AUPRC (%) ↑
TASR (%) ↑
Success Rate (%) ↑
FID
CRS
Diff
ACC
STAC
Ours
BC
HG
Diff
Ours
BC
HG
Diff
Ours
π0.5
SC–Green
96.74
94.67
80.88
72.11
63.82
99.72
49.24
24.22
22.20
87.82
49
29
34
81
SC–Red
98.36
99.57
82.94
71.13
65.87
99.30
35.01
35.36
31.66
46.25
48
39
55
76
OD–Handle
96.82
98.70
83.32
54.31
60.69
98.80
18.45
19.85
20.59
24.71
46
41
55
68
OD–Place
96.66
98.30
87.79
68.77
63.94
97.73
17.46
18.89
26.41
28.50
43
37
52
64
SP–Green
93.25
94.33
89.94
64.25
73.67
97.35
28.24
25.85
26.52
33.49
50
47
46
53
TABLE I: Simulation results across tasks and VLA backbones.
Fig. 6: Qualitative illustrations and recorded monitoring scores for OpenDrawer under (a) grasp-pose OOD and (b) target-position OOD. These examples illustrate the goal of requesting expert assistance before the task stage associated with the capability gap, so that the collected demonstrations better support learning the target behavior.
Fig. 7: Real-world task and an illustrative FTA case. Top: The task comprises cable pickup, handover, and precise connector insertion into the target board. Bottom: Expert correction following a late takeover provides feedback for FTA to lower the takeover threshold, enabling an earlier request for assistance in the next rollout.
Fig. 8: (a) Takeover Timing Study. Post-training success rate and TASR across six fixed takeover steps on OpenDrawer (Grasp-OOD) with matched retained expert-action budgets and training settings. (b) FTA Ablation. TASR and post-training success with and without FTA on StackCube–Green and OpenDrawer–Pose.
Fig. 9: Real-world ID and OOD configurations for cable insertion. The target board is fixed at its training position in ID and moved to two different positions in OOD1 and OOD2 for data collection and evaluation. The percentage at the upper right of each panel indicates the base policy’s success rate.
Fig. 10: Real-world success rates under two OOD conditions. Overall combines both conditions.
Recent advances in robot learning have enabled generalist control policies capable of completing a wide range of tasks. However, their performance degrades when deployed in unseen environments, making it critical to detect failures and teach recovery behaviors. Existing runtime monitoring methods often require task- and policy-specific training or hyperparameter tuning, limiting cross-task deployment and introducing additional overhead during iterative policy updates. We present Reward-DAgger, a robot-gated interactive imitation learning framework that uses dense progress signals from a general-purpose reward model to determine when human intervention is needed. Our approach is agnostic to the underlying policy architecture, requires no access to policy internals, and can be applied across tasks without retuning the gating mechanism. Our results show that Reward-DAgger achieves a better failure-detection accuracy-latency tradeoff than existing runtime monitoring baselines. Across eight simulated and real-world tasks, Reward-DAgger consistently improves the downstream policy's autonomous success rate throughout interactive learning and achieves strong return on human effort, outperforming the baselines in most settings. Importantly, the same gating configuration is used across tasks without task-specific hyperparameter tuning, demonstrating transfer across tasks, environments, and policy architectures. Code and videos are available at https://liralab.usc.edu/reward-dagger.
Ryan Li, Yigit Korkmaz, Erdem Bıyık
Department of Mathematics, University of Southern California · Thomas Lord Department of Computer Science, University of Southern California
Vision-Language-Action (VLA) policies typically predict actions at fixed time intervals, coupling the route a robot follows with its execution pace. This coupling complicates adaptation from teleoperation: useful geometric guidance comes with timing shaped by interface delays and operator behavior. Our key insight is to bring the path-time parameterization of classical motion planning into the learned action representation of a VLA. We introduce PathTime-VLA, which represents motion as a progress-indexed interaction path X(s) and a positive interval-time profile. The latter defines a monotone time law t(s), yielding controller commands X(s(t)). For a given path, alternative executions are expressed through the time profile, allowing chunk-wise speed choices without changing the geometric prediction target. This representation supports a staged post-training procedure: demonstrations and DAgger interventions establish a target-domain prior, Speed-DQN learns execution multipliers from robot interaction, and Path-AWR uses rollout outcomes to refine the diffusion path generator. A path-conditioned action expert realizes the resulting motions while maintaining distinct learning interfaces for path generation and execution timing. Across three tasks, the complete method achieves 58/60 successes versus 57/60 for PathTime-VLA under BC + DAgger at fixed 1×, with approximately 39-52% shorter mean completion times over successful trials.
Robots deployed in the real world should learn from their experience and improve over time. This requires a mechanism of practicing and learning from feedback. In this paper, we propose VERITAS, a generator-verifier framework for generalist robot policies for inference-time policy steering and self-improvement. We use a pre-trained generalist robot policy as a generator'' and pair it with a gradient-free visual verifier'' that evaluates actions at inference time. This framework enables inference-time steering that improves policy performance without additional training. We demonstrate that inference-time verification consistently outperforms vanilla generalists without training on additional demonstration data. Additionally, we demonstrate that the verified rollouts provide effective supervision for offline policy improvement: policies fine-tuned on verified self-generated trajectories achieve consistent performance gains. Notably, we find that post-training with verified rollouts achieves comparable efficiency to expert demonstrations, while requiring no human interventions. Our results highlight inference-time verification as a practical and scalable mechanism for improving robotic policies during deployment.