Video-based policy learning is particularly promising, as it illustrates target behaviors without requiring action annotations or embodiment-matched demonstrations. A central challenge is deciding what information should be transferred from the video to the robot. Existing approaches commonly convert visual observations into scalar similarity or value signals, or ask foundation models to directly generate reward code. These approaches can make the temporal structure of a task difficult to inspect, ground, and reuse. We present Video2STL, a framework that converts observation-only videos into parametric Signal Temporal Logic (STL) specifications and uses the resulting formal representation for robot learning. A vision-language model extracts an embodiment-independent semantic event trace and constructs a bank of symbolic temporal specifications. The model determines the task structure, while numerical predicate thresholds and temporal bounds are grounded from successful robot trajectories. For policy learning, we separate short- and long-timescale temporal information: short-horizon specifications provide dense rewards through rolling-window quantitative robustness, while a causal monitor over a retained long-horizon specification provides one-time progress rewards for valid temporal prefixes. The same representation supports cross-embodiment transfer from human or animal videos to robot control. Across four manipulation tasks, Video2STL achieves 85.8% average success-once and 67.0% success-at-end, compared with 81.5%/59.5% for native dense PPO and 65.0%/42.3% for Text2Reward; in quadruped locomotion, Qwen-3.8 and GPT-5.6-based Video2STL policies achieve 100% success across velocities from 0.3 to 2.1m/s while remaining competitive in high-speed energy efficiency. Project webpage: video2stl.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of Video2STL framework. A VLM parses an observation video into a semantic event trace and generates parametric STL formulas. Predicate thresholds and temporal bounds are then fitted to target-embodiment trajectories. Smooth rolling-window robustness over short-horizon formulas provides dense local guidance, while a causal prefix monitor over the long-horizon backbone yields milestone progress rewards for RL policy training.
Video2STL (Qwen 3.8)
Video2STL (GPT-5.6)
Text2Reward
Heuristic
vx (m/s)
Surv. ↑
Succ. ↑
CoT ↓
Surv. ↑
Succ. ↑
CoT ↓
Surv. ↑
Succ. ↑
CoT ↓
Surv. ↑
Succ. ↑
CoT ↓
0.3
100%
100%
2.63±0.08
100%
100%
2.63±0.06
100%
100%
0.91±0.01
100%
100%
1.20±0.00
0.5
100%
100%
1.86±0.03
100%
100%
1.80±0.04
100%
100%
0.80±0.00
100%
100%
1.00±0.00
0.7
100%
100%
1.58±0.02
100%
100%
1.52±0.03
100%
100%
0.75±0.00
100%
100%
1.00±0.00
1.0
100%
100%
1.37±0.01
100%
100%
1.26±0.01
100%
100%
0.74±0.00
100%
100%
1.20±0.00
1.3
100%
100%
1.22±0.01
100%
100%
1.17±0.01
100%
100%
0.79±0.00
100%
100%
1.30±0.00
Table 1: Quadruped locomotion performance across commanded forward velocities. Survival and success are reported as percentages, and CoT denotes cost of transportation. Higher is better for survival and success; lower is better for CoT.
Appendix figures & tables7 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
GPT-5.6
Gemini 3.1
Qwen 3.8
vx (m/s)
Surv. ↑
Succ. ↑
CoT ↓
Surv. ↑
Succ. ↑
CoT ↓
Surv. ↑
Succ. ↑
CoT ↓
0.3
100%
100%
2.63±0.06
100%
25%
2.37±0.09
100%
100%
2.63±0.08
0.5
100%
100%
1.80±0.04
100%
100%
1.97±0.04
100%
100%
1.86±0.03
0.7
100%
100%
1.52±0.03
100%
100%
1.66±0.03
100%
100%
1.58±0.02
1.0
100%
100%
1.26±0.01
100%
100%
1.26±0.02
100%
100%
1.37±0.01
1.3
100%
100%
1.17±0.01
100%
100%
1.14±0.01
100%
100%
1.22±0.01
Appendix
Table 2: Quadruped locomotion performance using STL specifications generated by different VLMs. Survival and success are reported as percentages, and CoT denotes cost of transportation. Higher is better for survival and success; lower is better for CoT.
ID
Formula
wi
φ1
⋀ℓ∈LR(Dℓ)
0
φ2
⋀ℓ∈LR(Lℓ)
0
φ3
R(DFL∧DHR)∧R(DFR∧DHL)
0
φ4
R(LFL∧LHR)∧R(LFR∧LHL)
0
φ5
R(CFL∧CHR)∧R(CFR∧CHL)
1
φ6
R(SFL∧SHR)∧R(SFR∧SHL)
1
Appendix
Table 3: GPT-5.6 specifications and final weights. Gray formulas were filtered out; φ11 was rejected before training. Dℓ,Lℓ,Cℓ,Sℓ denote touchdown, liftoff, contact, and swing. R(p)=G[0,H](F[0,hc]p) and B(p,q)=G[0,H](p→F[0,hs]q) . Z,P denote trunk-height and pitch stability. All tanh scales are si=1 .
Parameter
Role
Value
Temporal
H
history-window setting, all modes
30 steps
hc
recurrence bound
(29,20,15) steps
hs
response bound
(14,10,7) steps
Mode hysteresis
walk/trot entry, exit
0.72,0.65 m/s
trot/bound entry, exit
1.55,1.45 m/s
Appendix
Table 4: GPT-5.6 grounding and reward parameters. All values are fixed in the reward implementation, except the support count, which is specified by the VLM, and the filtering rule. Triples follow walk/trot/bound mode order; Δt=0.02 s.
ID
Formula
wi
φ1
R(DHR)∧R(LHR)
0
φ2
R(DFR)∧R(LFR)
0
φ3
R(DHL)∧R(LHL)
0
φ4
R(DFL)∧R(LFL)
0
φ5
B(DHR,DFR)
1
φ6
B(DHL,DFL)
0.70
Appendix
Table 5: Qwen specifications and final weights. Gray formulas were filtered out; φ11 was rejected before training. Dℓ,Lℓ,Cℓ,Sℓ denote touchdown, liftoff, contact, and swing. R(p)=G[0,H](F[0,hc]p) and B(p,q)=G[0,H](p→F[0,hs]q) . Z,P,R denote trunk-height, pitch, and roll stability. All tanh scales are si=1 .
Parameter
Role
Value
Temporal
H
history-window setting, all modes
30 steps
hc
recurrence bound
(29,20,15) steps
hs
response bound
(14,10,7) steps
Mode hysteresis
walk/trot entry, exit
0.72,0.65 m/s
trot/bound entry, exit
1.55,1.45 m/s
Appendix
Table 6: Qwen grounding and reward parameters, supplied by the stage-3 configuration except the VLM-specified support count and the filtering rule. Triples follow walk/trot/bound mode order; Δt=0.02 s.
ID
Formula
wi
φ1
G[0,H]Z∧G[0,H]P
1
φ2
G[0,H](support_count_at_least(2))
1
φ3
R(DFL)∧R(DHR)
1
φ4
R(LHL)
1
φ5
B(DHL,DFL)
1
φ6
B(DHR,DFR)
1
Appendix
Table 7: Gemini specifications and final aggregation priors. Gray formulas were filtered out. Dℓ and Lℓ denote touchdown and liftoff. R(p)=G[0,H](F[0,hc]p) and B(p,q)=G[0,H](p→F[0,hp]q) . Z and P denote trunk-height and pitch stability. The first six rows are Gemini-generated; the remaining rows are implementation-supplied safety and tracking terms.
Parameter
Role
Value
Temporal
H ( Hepisode )
outer always bound
(30,24) steps
hc
recurrence bound
25 steps
hp
phase-response bound
13 steps
W
velocity/yaw tracking bound
(30,24) steps
Mode hysteresis
trot entry / walk return
0.72,0.65 m/s
Appendix
Table 8: Gemini grounding and reward parameters. Parenthesized pairs follow walk/trot mode order; unpaired values are shared; Δt=0.02 s.