Reward design remains a major bottleneck for reinforcement learning in robotic manipulation. Handcrafted dense rewards can compensate for the limited guidance provided by sparse rewards, but require substantial task-specific reward engineering. Learning rewards from videos provides a scalable, data-driven alternative to manual reward design. However, existing video-based rewards are often computed in entangled visual spaces where task-relevant state changes are confounded with extraneous visual variation. As a result, the learned reward may respond to visual distractors instead of actual task execution. To address this limitation, we propose DiTaR (Disentangling Task-Relevant Latent Dynamics for Reward Modeling), a framework for learning dense rewards from heterogeneous videos. DiTaR learns a continuous task-relevant representation from multi-frame video latents through an asymmetric two-stage procedure that suppresses task-irrelevant visual variation. In the task-relevant latent space, we train a history- and language-conditioned rectified-flow model to capture task dynamics and derive a directional dense reward from temporal changes in dynamics compatibility. Together, these components enable reward modeling directly over task-relevant dynamics rather than generic visual variation. DiTaR substantially improves policy learning on MetaWorld-v3 and ManiSkill over video-based reward baselines, and transfers to real-world offline RL through reward relabeling. Reward analyses further show that DiTaR provides more reliable rewards.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: DiTaR learns dense rewards from task-relevant latent dynamics. The DiTaR reward accelerates RL convergence while remaining stable under nuisance visual variations, enabling robust policy learning across diverse tasks.
Figure 2: Pipeline overview. DiTaR disentangles task-irrelevant and task-relevant latents through an asymmetric two-stage representation learning procedure. A history- and language-conditioned rectified-flow model captures task-relevant transition dynamics, and the temporal difference of its residual-based compatibility score provides the dense reward.
Benchmark
Method
Final SR ↑
SR ≥ 80 ↑
Reach 0.8 ↑
NormT @ 0.8 ↓
MetaWorld
Env-only
56.8
50.0
50.0
0.68
VIPER
39.9
33.3
41.7
0.73
Diff. Reward
13.1
8.3
8.3
0.92
ReWiND
65.2
33.3
41.7
0.61
DiTaR
94.3
91.7
91.7
0.24
ManiSkill
Env-only
74.6
50.0
75.0
0.58
Table 1: Aggregate RL performance on MetaWorld and ManiSkill. We report final success rate, task coverage, and normalized time-to-threshold. ↑ higher is better, ↓ lower is better.
Figure 3: Main RL performance. DiTaR achieves strong and consistent policy learning across 12 MetaWorld and 4 ManiSkill tasks, outperforming Env-only, VIPER, Diffusion Reward, and ReWiND in aggregate performance. Panels use task-specific x-axis ranges for readability.
Figure 4: Ablation on history conditioning. Removing visual history from the conditional dynamics model reduces learning efficiency and final performance across the evaluated MetaWorld tasks.
Figure 5: Ablation on temporal-difference reward. Temporal differencing improves policy learning over directly using the absolute compatibility score ϕt across MetaWorld and ManiSkill tasks.
MetaWorld
Real-world
Perturbation
DiTaR
Diff. R.
VIPER
ReWiND
DiTaR
Diff. R.
VIPER
ReWiND
(a) Temporal sensitivity: Δ (%) ↓
Locally shuffled
−22.2
−0.6
−10.2
+0.1
−3.2
+0.1
−10.0
+0.2
Temporal jitter ±2
−19.1
−0.3
−4.7
+1.5
−4.2
−0.2
−5.5
+0.6
Shuffled chunks
−28.9
+0.5
−9.3
−15.9
−7.0
−1.6
−11.8
+19.1
(b) Visual robustness: ∣Δ∣ (%) ↓
Table 2: Reward sensitivity and robustness. For temporal perturbations, Δ denotes the signed reward change from clean trajectories, with more negative values indicating stronger temporal sensitivity. For visual perturbations, ∣Δ∣ denotes the reward-change magnitude, with smaller values indicating greater robustness. Diff. R.: Diffusion Reward.
Figure 6: Reward robustness to visual perturbations. Per-frame reward trajectories on MetaWorld expert rollouts under lighting changes and 1.25× camera zoom. Δ denotes the relative mean reward change from the clean rollout. DiTaR shows substantially smaller reward shifts than VIPER, Diffusion Reward, and ReWiND under both perturbations.
Figure 7: Real-world task suite. Three tabletop manipulation tasks used for offline RL evaluation: (a) object-to-basket placement, (b) bottle-to-plate placement, and (c) knife-to-glove placement.
Metric
VIPER
Diffusion Reward
ReWiND
DiTaR
Success Rate
16.7%
26.7%
43.3%
83.3%
Table 3: Real-world offline RL results. All methods relabel the same offline demonstrations and use the same IQL training pipeline. We conduct 10 evaluation trials per task.
Appendix figures & tables16 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Dataset
Ratio (%)
View
Frame stride
AgiBotWorld ( Bu et al., 2025a )
38.0
Head
{1,2,3,4}
DROID ( Khazatsky et al., 2024 )
38.0
Exterior
{1,2,3,4}
Bridge ( Walke et al., 2023 )
19.0
Exterior
{1,2,3}
MetaWorld ( McLean et al., 2025 )
2.5
Left
{1,2}
ManiSkill ( Gu et al., 2023 )
2.5
Default
1
Appendix
Table 4: Video sources, proportions, camera views, and frame strides used for DiTaR pretraining.
Bridge
Real-world
Corruption
DiTaR
Diff. R.
VIPER
DiTaR
Diff. R.
VIPER
Signed reward change: Δ (%) ↓
Backward drift
−2.4
−1.1
−0.5
−1.6
+7.0
+0.6
Looped segment
−3.5
−0.6
−1.7
−1.0
+7.4
+0.7
Shuffled chunks
−16.8
−0.7
−6.0
−9.2
−2.5
−11.8
Duplicate frames
−21.1
+0.9
+7.0
−26.4
+6.8
+5.3
Appendix
Table 5: Temporal sensitivity. Signed reward changes Δ (%) over 16 expert episodes per dataset. More negative values indicate stronger temporal sensitivity. The largest decrease per row and dataset is bold. Diff. R.: Diffusion Reward.
Figure 8: Temporal corruption on Bridge. Clean and corrupted rewards over 16 episodes. Bands indicate one standard deviation; Δ is the mean signed reward shift.
Figure 9: Temporal corruption localization. Temporal jitter of ±2 frames is applied to the shaded middle third. Left two columns: MetaWorld, “take the object out of the hole.” Right: ManiSkill, “push the red T-shaped block into place.” Solid and dashed curves show clean and corrupted rewards.
Dataset
Method
Temporal jitter ↑
Local shuffling ↑
MetaWorld
VIPER
0.91
0.96
MetaWorld
DiTaR
0.95
1.00
ManiSkill
DiTaR
0.83
0.94
Appendix
Table 6: Temporal corruption localization. Mean localization AUCs on MetaWorld and ManiSkill; higher values indicate better localization.
Camera yaw
4∘
8∘
16∘
24∘
32∘
Relative change ratio
3.8×
5.2×
4.8×
10.7×
6.6×
Smaller DiTaR change (% of videos)
82
86
86
100
100
Appendix
Table 7: Viewpoint robustness on ManiSkill. Relative reward-change ratio (ReWiND/DiTaR) and percentage of videos with a smaller reward change for DiTaR.
Figure 10: Viewpoint robustness on ManiSkill. Relative reward changes under synthetic camera yaw (circles) and a second rendered view of the same rollout (stars). The vertical axis is logarithmic; smaller changes indicate greater robustness.
Figure 11: Rewards under visual perturbations. Left two columns: MetaWorld, “press the button,” under 1.25× camera zoom. Right column: ManiSkill, “push the red T-shaped block into place,” under a second camera view. Solid and dashed curves show clean and perturbed rewards.
Figure 12: Reward evolution during policy learning. DiTaR rewards at a fixed task-specific timestep across training stages on 12 MetaWorld-v3 tasks. Solid curves show smoothed traces and dashed lines show linear fits.
Table 8: Task-relevant latent ablation on MetaWorld-v3, with baseline results for comparison. Metrics are defined in Sec. F.3 .
Figure 13: Task-relevant latent ablation. Learning curves on 12 MetaWorld-v3 tasks comparing DiTaR’s task-relevant latents with latents from a single-stage reconstruction-based encoder trained without language conditioning. Both variants use the same conditional rectified-flow architecture and TD reward formulation, with the dynamics model trained separately for each latent representation. DiTaR achieves higher overall success and learns more efficiently.
Figure 14: Cross-dataset latent grouping. Groups of five-frame clips with pairwise cosine similarity of at least 0.90 in the task-relevant latent space. The left and right groups show placing and picking behaviors across different robots and visual settings.
Hyperparameter
Value
Input latent dimension
48
Frames per training window
5
Model dimension
768
Attention heads
12
Encoder blocks
4
Decoder blocks
12
Appendix
Table 9: Architecture and training settings for the latent encoders. The pretrained Wan VAE and T5-base text encoder are frozen throughout representation learning.
Hyperparameter
Value
History input
Five-frame history encoded by the Wan VAE
History tokens / token dimension
512 / 48
Target input
Task-relevant latent of the target clip
Target tokens / token dimension
4 / 32
Text conditioning
Target-only cross-attention; scalar gate initialized to 0
Model dimension
512
Appendix
Table 10: Architecture and training settings for the conditional rectified-flow model.
Hyperparameter
Value
Environment
Action repeat
1
Frame stack
1
Observation size
64×64×3
Episode length
250 environment steps
Per-task training budget
3×106 environment frames
Appendix
Table 11: Online visual RL settings for MetaWorld-v3 and ManiSkill.
Table 12: Task-specific reward and exploration coefficients (λD,λexpl) in Eq. ( 15 ), shared across learned-reward methods. Following the reward-mixing setup of Diffusion Reward ( Huang et al., 2024 ) , we use task-specific reward and exploration coefficients. Tasks sharing the same coefficient pair are grouped in a single row.
Well-designed dense reward functions in robot manipulation not only indicate whether a task is completed but also encode progress along the way. Generally, designing dense rewards is challenging and usually requires access to privileged state information available only in simulation, not in real-world experiments. This makes reward prediction models that infer task state information from camera images attractive. A common approach is to predict rewards from expert demonstrations based on visual similarity or sequential frame ordering. However, this biases the resulting reward function towards a specific solution and leaves it undefined in states not covered by the demonstrations. In this work, we introduce Rewarding DINO, a method for language-conditioned reward modeling that learns actual reward functions rather than specific trajectories. The model's compact size allows it to serve as a direct replacement for analytical reward functions with comparatively low computational overhead. We train our model on data sampled from 24 Meta-World+ tasks using a rank-based loss and evaluate pairwise accuracy, rank correlation, and calibration. Rewarding DINO achieves competitive performance in tasks from the training set and generalizes to new settings in simulation and the real world, indicating that it learns task semantics. We also test the model with off-the-shelf reinforcement learning algorithms to solve tasks from our Meta-World+ training set.
Pierre Krack, Tobias Jülg, Wolfram Burgard +1
Department of Computer Science & Artificial Intelligence, University of Technology Nuremberg, Germany. · TUM School of Computation, Information and Technology, Technical University of Munich, Germany
Reinforcement learning for long-horizon robotic manipulation is often limited by sparse and delayed rewards, while manually designing dense shaping signals is costly and brittle to changes in environments and object configurations. This work proposes Stage-Transition Dense Reward (STDR), a visual reward-learning framework that converts unstructured expert videos into logically grounded dense rewards for training RL agents from scratch. STDR leverages semantic understanding to infer a task's stage structure from demonstrations, and delivers two complementary learning signals during online training: (i) stage-transition feedback that provides goal-directed reward, and (ii) within-stage progress feedback that supplies fine-grained guidance toward completing each stage. Furthermore, an out-of-distribution (OOD) detection mechanism and a grasping regulation module are integrated to enhance robustness and prevent reward hacking. Experiments on 14 manipulation tasks across MetaWorld, ManiSkill, and Franka Kitchen show that STDR consistently improves sample efficiency and success rates over multiple baselines, and matches or surpasses handcrafted dense rewards on several challenging tasks. Real-robot evaluations further indicate that STDR assigns stable, progress-aligned rewards on successful executions while producing appropriately low rewards for failures, suggesting robustness to visual noise and better-calibrated reward assignment across settings.
Reinforcement learning holds great promise for improving robot policies beyond the limits of imitation learning. However, its practical adoption remains bottlenecked by the lack of reliable vision-language reward models that provide dense and informative feedback. Two key challenges remain: acquiring diverse failure data at scale and obtaining fine-grained reward signals beyond sparse trajectory-level success labels. Collecting failure trajectories typically requires laborious human effort, while pseudo-failures constructed by relabeling successful demonstrations fail to capture the diverse physical failure modes that arise during robot execution. Meanwhile, existing reward models often predict sparse binary or trajectory-level rewards, which provide limited guidance for efficient policy optimization. We introduce DenseReward, a dense robotic reward model that addresses both challenges. To train DenseReward, we develop an automated failure data generation pipeline that synthesizes physically realistic failure trajectories in simulation without human labeling, covering diverse failure modes such as collisions, missed grasps, object drops, and recovery behaviors. DenseReward predicts dense frame-level reward scores from visual observations and language instructions, enabling fine-grained estimation of task progress throughout an episode. Experiments show that DenseReward outperforms general-purpose VLMs and existing robotic reward models in dense reward prediction across both simulated and real-world manipulation. We further demonstrate that DenseReward provides effective reward guidance for downstream model predictive control and reinforcement learning. We release the dataset, trained reward models, and evaluation suite to support the development of failure-aware dense reward modeling for robot learning.
Yu Fang, Wanxi Dong, Jiaqi Liu +7
University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill · Carnegie Mellon University · Shanghai Jiao Tong University +1