cs.ROOct 21, 2026

NavBind: Diagnosing Instruction-Action Binding at Route Forks in Navigation VLAs

Authors: Josh Qixuan Sun, Xiaoying Xing, Yurun Chen, Huaiyuan Weng, Wentao Zhu, Mark Crowley

Organizations: University of Waterloo · Northwest University · Shanghai Jiao Tong University · Eastern Institute of Technology, Ningbo

Abstract

Vision-language-action (VLA) navigation models translate visual observations and instructions into actions. Navigation success assesses whether an agent reaches the goal. However, reaching the goal successfully does not establish whether the model genuinely follows the instructions or relies on visual cues or navigation history. We introduce NavBind to diagnose instruction-action binding: whether changing the instruction influences the probabilistic distribution of the actions, with the navigation context fixed. We construct 3,252 route-fork contexts by recombining route-aligned instruction segments from R2R-CE and RxR-CE. Each context pairs full instructions that share the description of the route already traveled but specify different branches. Both are evaluated under the same agent state and navigation history. We compare generated local action sequences, the likelihoods of fixed reference action sequences under both instructions, and changes in visual attention and attribution. Across the evaluated models, higher reported navigation success does not imply that the model more faithfully follows the instructions.

Figures & tables

Explore similar work

Oct 9, 2026

GuidedNav: Shaping Vision-Language Navigation Representations through Pre-action Attention and Spatial Guidance

Vision-and-language navigation (VLN) requires an agent to track progress through an extended instruction, identify landmarks relevant to its current objective, and understand the surrounding spatial structure to act. End-to-end navigation policies typically rely on action supervision to implicitly learn these capabilities. Without explicit guidance on the evidence underlying each decision, however, policies can overfit to correlations predictive of training actions rather than learn the task-relevant grounding and geometry needed for generalization. Our insight is to guide the representations that connect instructions to actions: identifying what remains to be done determines which visual evidence matters, while understanding the geometry around that evidence informs how to move. We introduce GuidedNav, a unified framework that explicitly shapes these representations through training-time guidance. Subtask and landmark guidance steer native pre-action attention toward the active instruction segment and relevant visual regions, grounding action prediction in the current objective. Spatial guidance aligns the policy's internal representations with geometric features that capture long-horizon context and local spatial structure. Together, these objectives strengthen navigation capabilities while avoiding the inference overhead of intermediate textual reasoning and online geometric encoding. We also introduce Guided-R2R and Guided-RxR, two annotation-enriched navigation datasets that support more interpretable VLN research. GuidedNav establishes state-of-the-art performance among the compared monocular RGB policies, improving success rates by 8.1% and 13.1% relative to the strongest prior results on R2R-CE and RxR-CE val-unseen, respectively, while achieving faster inference. Extensive experiments further demonstrate the effectiveness and real-world transferability of our approach.
Oct 15, 2026

Do VLAs Really Follow Instructions? Diagnosing How-Level Instruction Following in Vision-Language-Action Models

Vision-language-action (VLA) models are expected to follow instructions like their language backbones, yet prior work has focused on What-level instructions that specify the task rather than How-level instructions that specify how to carry it out. Through our diagnoses, we find that How-level instructions do not help current VLAs and lower task success. We hypothesize that pairing each training episode with a single instruction limits How-level instruction following, and show that training with segment-level enriched instructions makes actions respond to such instructions without consistently raising task success. To measure How-level instruction following beyond standard benchmarks, we introduce SIMPLER-IN, where success requires conditions given only in the instruction. It shows that the gained responsiveness does not extend to demanding or out-of-distribution How-level instructions. How-level instruction following thus remains an open challenge.
Aug 4, 2026

From Routes to Steps: Separating Semantic Progress from Local Execution in Vision-and-Language Navigation

Vision-and-Language Navigation (VLN) requires an agent to follow a route-level instruction by executing its constituent steps from egocentric visual observations. Existing VLM-based navigators typically supervise both capabilities through next-action prediction alone, making progress-tracking errors difficult to distinguish from execution errors. When an agent deviates from the route, a corrective action label may recover the next movement but does not indicate whether the agent selected the wrong sub-instruction or failed to execute the correct one. Consequently, the agent may continue making decisions from an erroneous progress state. To resolve this ambiguity, we propose Route2Step, a framework that decouples semantic progress tracking from action generation through an explicit step-level interface. The Instruction Analysis Module (MIA\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{IA}}) predicts this state from the global instruction and visual history. Conditioned on the predicted state and recent observations, the Action Generation Module (MAG\mathcal{M}_{\mathrm{AG}}) generates local action chunks. To supervise the progress state without manual temporal labels, E-SPA, a step-alignment procedure, associates sub-instructions with their corresponding portions of route-level demonstrations. These alignments enable state supervision for incorrect progress estimates, while direct action supervision is reserved for rollout groups that repeatedly fail under the correct active sub-instruction. On R2R-CE, Route2Step improves SR from 48.1% to 55.3% and SPL from 43.3% to 48.2%, using 190K state-level corrective samples while requiring only 11.5K directly action-supervised states. Experiments in real-world indoor and outdoor environments further demonstrate the practical applicability of Route2Step. The project page is: https://sisyphus-hxy.github.io/Route2Step/.