Progress-Guided Preference Generation for Aligning Generative Control Policies
Authors: Tung M. Luu, Tri Ton, Duc M. Nguyen, Xuan Thanh Nguyen, Nguyen Gia Binh, Quang Tan Nguyen, Vu Duong, Daniel Sonntag, Duy M. H. Nguyen, Vien Anh Ngo, Chang D. Yoo
Organizations: KAIST · Center for AI Research & CECS, VinUniversity · VinRobotics · DFKI · University of Oldenburg · University of Stuttgart · Max Planck Research School for Intelligent Systems
Generative policies have achieved strong performance in imitation learning tasks, but their success is often constrained by the limited availability of expert demonstrations. Although preference-based fine-tuning can leverage suboptimal rollouts to improve performance, existing approaches heavily rely on expensive human annotations. In this work, we introduce Progress-Guided Preference Generation (PGPG), an unsupervised preference alignment framework that eliminates the need for human-in-the-loop supervision. Our method leverages ordered coverage alignment to measure sequential progress relative to a small set of expert demonstrations, enabling the automatic extraction of pseudo-preference labels from autonomously collected rollouts. Furthermore, we introduce key enhancements to improve the reliability of these progress-guided preferences, enabling effective fine-tuning of pretrained generative policies without requiring manually designed reward functions. Extensive experiments across a suite of challenging long-horizon manipulation tasks demonstrate that PGPG outperforms standard supervised fine-tuning baselines. Moreover, our conceptually simple framework is broadly applicable across multiple classes of generative policies, demonstrating strong versatility when integrated with both diffusion and flow-matching policies.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of PGPG . Autonomously collected rollouts ( Drollout ) are scored against expert references ( Ddemo ) using an alignment pipeline consisting of Ordered Coverage Alignment, Marginal Progress Scoring, and Multi-Demonstration Aggregation. The aggregated segment scores are then used to derive the preference labels. The resulting dataset Dpref provides structured, dense pseudo-preferences to stably fine-tune generative policies πθ(a∣s) without manual reward engineering.
Figure 2: Success rates of methods on five Robomimic manipulation tasks. Error bars denote standard deviation across seeds. DPPO is applied only to the diffusion policy.
Method
Lift
Can
Square
Transp.
ToolHang
Temporal OT
20.7 ± 1.2
58.7 ± 5.8
62.7 ± 3.1
36.7 ± 6.1
32.0 ± 5.3
Temporal OT + MPS
82.0 ± 2.0
72.0 ± 5.3
51.3 ± 10.1
43.3 ± 5.0
41.3 ± 8.3
DTW
90.7 ± 3.1
70.0 ± 5.3
72.7 ± 1.2
45.3 ± 11.0
30.0 ± 8.7
DTW + MPS
80.0 ± 5.3
78.0 ± 7.2
62.7 ± 7.0
38.7 ± 2.3
31.3 ± 7.0
ORCA
32.0 ± 2.0
70.7 ± 5.0
42.0 ± 3.5
47.3 ± 4.6
41.3 ± 3.1
ORCA + MPS (Ours)
96.7 ± 1.2
89.3 ± 4.6
72.0 ± 7.2
58.7 ± 6.1
56.0 ± 8.7
Table 1: Comparison of fine-tuning performance using preference labels generated by different sequence-matching metrics within our framework. Best results and those within one standard deviation are bolded.
Figure 3: Ablation study across different design choices.
Appendix figures & tables10 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Number of rollouts
Lift
Square
500
96.7 ± 1.2
72.0 ± 7.2
375
94.7 ± 3.2
71.7 ± 2.5
250
96.0 ± 3.0
69.7 ± 6.1
125
92.3 ± 4.5
65.7 ± 3.1
Appendix
Table 2: PGPG’s performance using different numbers of rollouts ( i.e. , ∣Drollout∣ ).
Number of demos
Lift
Can
Square
Base policy
44.0 ± 7.2
42.7 ± 1.2
39.3 ± 3.1
0 (pure rollouts)
32.7 ± 4.6
64.7 ± 6.4
51.3 ± 5.0
40
95.3 ± 1.2
88.0 ± 4.0
56.7 ± 6.1
120
96.7 ± 1.2
89.3 ± 4.6
72.0 ± 7.2
Appendix
Table 3: PGPG’s performance using different numbers of demonstrations ( i.e. , ∣Ddemo∣ ).
Encoder
Lift
Can
Square
Base policy
44.0 ± 7.2
42.7 ± 1.2
39.3 ± 3.1
PGPG w/ VC-1
96.0 ± 4.0
83.3 ± 4.6
52.7 ± 3.1
PGPG w/ SigLIP2
68.7 ± 7.0
58.0 ± 8.7
42.7 ± 7.0
PGPG w/ R3M (Ours)
96.7 ± 1.2
89.3 ± 4.6
72.0 ± 7.2
Appendix
Table 4: PGPG performance with different visual encoders.
L
100
150
200
Success Rate
54.3 ± 7.6
71.3 ± 7.1
72.0 ± 7.2
Appendix
Table 5: Performance of PGPG with different segment lengths L on Square task.
Aggregation
Lift
Square
Mean
90.7 ± 2.3
52.7 ± 2.1
Max
96.7 ± 1.2
72.0 ± 7.2
Appendix
Table 6: Performance of PGPG with different aggregation operators across demonstrations.
Method
Lift
Can
Square
Transp.
ToolHang
CLIP
36.0 ± 7.2
62.0 ± 6.0
58.0 ± 8.7
21.3 ± 4.2
30.7 ± 9.0
S3D
53.3 ± 3.1
60.0 ± 3.5
62.8 ± 4.6
26.7 ± 4.2
54.0 ± 8.7
Robometer
38.7 ± 8.1
85.3 ± 3.1
40.0 ± 3.5
28.0 ± 6.9
31.3 ± 6.1
PGPG (Ours)
96.7 ± 1.2
89.3 ± 4.6
72.0 ± 7.2
58.7 ± 6.1
56.0 ± 8.7
Appendix
Table 7: Comparison with Vision-Language and Progress Reward Baselines. Best results and those within one standard deviation are bolded.
Figure 4: Average wall-clock time required to compute progress rewards per trajectory, evaluated over 50 rollouts. By leveraging the ORCA progress metric, PGPG is nearly 31× faster than the Robometer [ 29 ] baseline, successfully eliminating the high inference latency typically associated with progress reward models.
Figure 5: LIBERO-10 tasks: Each row of frames shows one of the five available expert demonstrations for a task, progressing from the initial state (left) to task completion (right).
Task
Instruction
Pretrained
Filtered BC
PGPG
T1
put both the alphabet soup and the tomato sauce in the basket
18.0 ± 5.3
37.3 ± 3.1
64.7 ± 7.6
T2
put both the cream cheese box and the butter in the basket
58.0 ± 2.0
76.7 ± 1.2
94.7 ± 3.1
T3
turn on the stove and put the moka pot on it
80.0 ± 3.5
76.7 ± 1.2
87.3 ± 3.1
T4
put the black bowl in the bottom drawer of the cabinet and close it
86.7 ± 4.2
96.0 ± 2.0
100.0 ± 0.0
T5
put the white mug on the left plate and put the yellow and white mug on the right plate
64.0 ± 5.3
81.3 ± 1.2
78.7 ± 1.2
T6
pick up the book and place it in the back compartment of the caddy
53.3 ± 8.1
72.7 ± 4.2
58.7 ± 1.2
Appendix
Table 8: Success rate (%) of methods on LIBERO-10. Mean ± standard deviation over three seeds with 50 episodes per task each. The best result for each task is shown in bold.
Hyperparameter
Value
Preference Generation (PGPG)
Reference Demonstrations ( M )
10-40
Discrimination Threshold ( ϵσ )
{0.3,0.4,0.6}
Visual Feature Encoder
R3M [ 44 ]
Distance Metric
Cosine Distance
Segment Length ( L )
100 (Lift, Can), 200 (Square), 300 (others)
Appendix
Table 9: Comprehensive list of hyperparameters for PGPG.
Preference-based reinforcement learning learns policies from comparisons or rankings of behaviors instead of requiring hand-designed numerical rewards.
We present PrefPI (Preference-Guided Policy Iteration), an iterative framework for steering pretrained generative robot policies using only relative preferences over self-generated trajectories. Unlike prior preference-learning methods that primarily sharpen modes already represented by the policy, we study steering beyond the initial effective support, where desired behaviors are rarely or never observed under the initial policy. Our key idea is to formulate preference learning as preference-conditioned generative modeling: preferred trajectories define a conditional distribution, whose density ratio with the broader behavior prior provides an implicit preference signal amplified by classifier-free guidance (CFG). Repeating this preference-conditioned modeling and guidance step yields a form of preference-guided policy iteration, turning incremental improvements toward previously inaccessible behaviors. Across diffusion policies and the PI0.5 flow- matching VLA in simulation and the real world, PrefPI produces substantial behavioral shifts with limited feedback. In particular, PrefPI increases object transport height from 10.7 cm to 19.8 cm on real hardware with only 150 preference-labeled trajectories.
Seungeun Rho, Wontaek Kim, Danfei Xu +1
School of Interactive Computing Georgia Institute of Technology
Post-training via Group Relative Policy Optimization (GRPO) has emerged as a powerful paradigm for aligning flow-based generative models with human preferences. However, the iterative denoising nature of flow models incurs substantial costs when generating group rollouts for policy-gradient updates, compelling existing methods to train with extremely few denoising steps. This temporal sparsity severely restricts preference optimization: reward feedback can only reach a handful of stages per trajectory, leaving the vast majority of intermediate denoising steps without direct supervision and thus compromising alignment granularity. To address this, we propose Pave-GRPO, which reformulates the GRPO objective through Principled average velocity decomposition. Rather than generating expensive high-step rollouts, we maintain efficient few-step group sampling but decompose each coarse transition into an equivalent ensemble of finer sub-trajectories spanning multiple intermediate timesteps. This propagates reward feedback to a denser set of temporal stages for more comprehensive preference alignment without additional generation cost. This design offers two benefits: (i) zero-cost horizon expansion: through the direct reuse of piece-wise group samples and their associated rewards, Pave-GRPO significantly broadens the effective optimization scope under fixed sampling budgets; and (ii) comprehensive temporal supervision: by equivalently decomposing an instantaneous velocity target into a multi-timestep ensemble, it distributes reward signals across more intermediate stages of the denoising process, enabling finer-grained and more thorough preference optimization. Extensive experiments validate that Pave-GRPO effectively advances preference alignment across different reward settings, offering comprehensive performance enhancement.
Pengyang Ling, Jiazi Bu, Yujie Zhou +6
University of Science and Technology of China, China · Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China · Fudan University, China +3
Generative control policies (GCPs), such as diffusion- and flow-based control policies, have emerged as effective parameterizations for robot learning. This work introduces Off-policy Generative Policy Optimization (OGPO), a sample-efficient algorithm for finetuning GCPs that maintains off-policy critic networks to maximize data reuse and propagate policy gradients through the full generative process of the policy via a modified PPO objective, using critics as the terminal reward. OGPO achieves state-of-the-art performance on manipulation tasks spanning multi-task settings, high-precision insertion, and dexterous control. To our knowledge, it is also the only method that can fine-tune poorly-initialized behavior cloning policies to near full task-success with no expert data in the online replay buffer, and does so with few task-specific hyperparameter tuning. Through extensive empirical investigations, we demonstrate that OGPO drastically outperforms methods alternatives on policy steering and learning residual corrections, and identify the key mechanisms behind its performance. We further introduce practical stabilization tricks, including success-buffer regularization, two-sided conservative advantages, and Q-variance reduction, to mitigate critic over-exploitation across state- and pixel-based settings. Beyond proposing OGPO, we conduct a systematic empirical study of GCP finetuning, identifying the stabilizing mechanisms and failure modes that govern successful off-policy full-policy improvement.