HoloBoxing presents a simple recipe for learning humanoid boxing by building on a pretrained whole-body controller. The recipe separates reusable motor skills from task decisions: a compact planner requests future body-point targets, while the frozen controller handles joint-level execution. A learned decoder maps 32-dimensional actions to structured target windows, and measured-state imitation initializes the planner before reinforcement learning. Task learning then refines interaction behavior while reusing the decoder and controller, avoiding the need to relearn whole-body control. This combination keeps task optimization focused on a compact upper policy and supplies an initial behavior before reward-driven exploration. Starting from that available controller, the recipe accounts for about seven minutes of additional training, including reused representation fitting and a single-GPU task run. This excludes controller pretraining, data preparation, evaluation, and search. Simulated boxing experiments and component controls evaluate the resulting behavior and the roles of imitation initialization and the target representation.
Figures & tables
Stage
Training or accounting scope
Runtime (s)
Reused target prior
Earlier fitting run; epoch 148 selected
47.2
Imitation initialization
20 epochs; final epoch selected
6.7
Standing warmup
32 updates
84.9
Interaction learning
128 updates
275.3
Other new-process time
Setup, saving, and exit
8.1
Total
Prior fitting plus complete new process
422.2
Table 1: Training-time accounting for HoloBoxing (7-min version). The new process uses one RTX 4090; target-prior fitting is reused from an earlier run.
Method
Existing motor capability
Reported additional training
HoloBoxing
General-purpose HoloMotion v2 controller
7.0 minutes including representation fitting, initialization, and task learning
SLMP
Tracking controller and latent prior
Approximately 8 hours for two-agent combat
RoboStriker
Tracking controller and latent prior
Task-stage wall-clock time unreported
GGSD
Joint skill discovery and gameplay learning
No separately timed post-controller adaptation stage reported
Table 2: Reported additional-training context. Existing motor-controller and prior pretraining are excluded from task-stage times. HoloBoxing additionally includes fitting its target representation and imitation initialization. Unreported denotes no wall-clock duration in the checked sources.
Figure 2: Elo trajectories and final ranking over 150 simulated bouts. Each pair plays ten bouts under the same robot parameters, arena, and referee.
Participant
Elo
W–L–D
Effective contacts
HoloBoxing (long version, 21.4 min)
1669
41–3–6
327:64
HoloBoxing (7-min version)
1541
26–17–7
76:196
RoboStriker
1524
28–22–0
337:29
GGSD run2
1476
20–25–5
69:155
w/o latent decoder (7-min version)
1428
4–22–24
3:165
w/o imitation (7-min version)
1362
4–34–12
0:203
Table 3: Complete-round snapshot of the shared-arena league. Contact counts are candidate-relative totals. The 7-min version and both component removals share a 128-update final-stage budget. The long version uses 256 final updates. HoloBoxing variants are evaluated as distinct league participants.
Opponent family
W–L–D
Contacts
Falls
GGSD
7–3–0
21:16
0:5
RoboStriker
4–6–0
4:85
2:6
Component removals
13–0–7
30:0
0:0
Long version
2–8–0
21:95
0:0
Table 4: Primary 7-min-version results by opponent family in the same complete-round snapshot. Contacts and falls report the primary version first.
Variant
Change from full recipe
New imitation epochs
New run (min)
HoloBoxing (7-min version)
No component removed
20
6.25
w/o imitation (7-min version)
Remove imitation updates
0
5.99
w/o latent decoder (7-min version)
Predict 225 target values directly
20
6.12
Table 5: Single-seed component controls with 128 final updates. New-run minutes include startup, setup, training, saving, and exit. The shared prior is accounted for separately below.
Self observation
Opponent input
Mean validation loss
Sample standard deviation
Ten-frame history
Yes
0.53513
0.00617
Ten-frame history
No
0.54799
0.01025
Three-frame history
Yes
0.46297
0.00333
Three-frame history
No
0.48215
0.00579
Current state
Yes
0.44447
0.00128
Current state
No
0.45782
0.00239
Table 6: Planner observation study. Each condition uses three seeds and the same frozen decoder; values are selected validation losses.
Appendix figures & tables6 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Source
Split
Groups
Files
Duration (s)
Prior targets
RoboStriker
Train
8
16
181.72
18092
InterHuman
Train
6
6
31.16
3056
RoboStriker
Validation
2
4
46.18
4598
InterHuman
Validation
2
2
64.96
6476
RoboStriker
Test
2
4
27.24
2704
InterHuman
Test
2
2
5.62
542
Appendix
Table A.1: Motion coverage by source and split. Duration counts each original source motion once; mirrors and the two participants do not multiply it.
Symbol or component
Meaning
Value
do
Public observation dimension
1097
K,H
Body points; future samples per point
5; 5
dp,dr
Position and orientation feature dimensions
3; 6
dg,dz,da
Target, latent, and motor-action dimensions
225; 32; 29
Δt
Control interval
20 ms; targets span 20–100 ms
Prior network
Encoder hidden widths
512, 256; reversed in decoder
Appendix
Table A.2: Implementation settings for the primary 7-min configuration.
Encoder hidden widths
Normalized error
Position error (cm)
Rotation error (degrees)
256, 128
0.052182±0.001057
2.653
5.249
512, 256
0.046047±0.000709
2.474
4.839
512, 256, 128
0.055442±0.002174
2.985
5.092
Appendix
Table C.1: Prior-capacity study. Normalized error is dimensionless; its variation is the sample standard deviation across three seeds.
Split and source
Windows
Normalized error
Position (cm)
Rotation (degrees)
Validation: RoboStriker
4598
0.01985
1.595
3.441
Validation: InterHuman
6476
0.06342
2.902
5.890
Test: RoboStriker
2704
0.00658
0.985
2.269
Test: InterHuman
542
0.78406
6.752
19.055
Appendix
Table C.2: Offline reconstruction of the selected prior. These errors describe decoded reference targets before physical execution.
Target population
Samples
Position error (cm)
Rotation error (degrees)
Paired source-frame references
6448
2.90
5.88
Measured-frame labels
6448
6.30
10.36
Measured subset, encoder initialization
256
6.37
12.27
Same subset, latent-only fitting
256
6.03
8.61
Appendix
Table C.3: Target-interface diagnostic on the measured validation population, with all representation weights and statistics frozen.
Figure E.1: Recorded boxing by HoloBoxing (7-min version, red) against GGSD (top, match r02-m005) and RoboStriker (bottom, match r05-m015). The opponent is blue. Top frames occur at 3.02, 29.02, and 45.72 seconds; bottom frames at 3.02, 10.36, and 12.54 seconds. Hit labels follow recorded referee events; the visible poses are the corresponding control-frame states. Camera and lighting are adjusted; wall faces and corner posts are hidden for visibility.
We introduce Humanoid Hanoi, a challenge problem for long-horizon humanoid skill composition that requires a robot to repeatedly sequence pickup, locomotion, and placement skills to rearrange stacked boxes in simulation and on hardware. This symbolically simple task exposes a weakness in a common modular humanoid architecture, where reusable high-level skills are learned on top of a shared, task-agnostic whole-body controller (WBC). While such a WBC provides a unified low-level interface for skill composition, it may not be sufficiently hardened to execute the full collection of learned skills under domain randomization and long-horizon closed-loop execution. We compare strategies for addressing this issue, including skill-specific WBC fine-tuning, residual low-level adaptation, and task-driven data aggregation that expands the shared-WBC training distribution with closed-loop trajectories induced by learned skills while preserving its original tracking objective. In our evaluated system, the shared-WBC approach achieves the strongest long-horizon robustness. A direct transition-smoothing intervention further shows that low-level controller handoffs account for a substantial part of the composition loss observed with non-shared controllers. Project page: https://osudrl.github.io/Humanoid_Hanoi/
Minku Kim, Kuan-Chia Chen, Aayam Shrestha +3
The authors are with the Collaborative Robotics and Intelligent Systems Institute, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, 97331, USA
Reinforcement learning can produce robust humanoid controllers, but each new task is typically trained as a separate policy with its own reward design and training process. Motion imitation provides an alternative source of motor competence by training policies to track retargeted human motions, yet the resulting controllers remain reference trackers and are not directly usable as task policies. We propose a three-stage pipeline that turns motion-imitation skills into a reusable hybrid motion prior (HMP) for humanoid locomotion. First, an expert policy is trained to imitate retargeted human motion-capture clips. Second, the expert is distilled into a frozen architecture composed of a proprioceptive encoder, a residual vector-quantized (RVQ) codebook, and an action decoder. Third, task-level policies are trained to solve locomotion tasks by selecting discrete codebook entries while the HMP remains frozen. We evaluate the method on velocity tracking, point-goal navigation, and fall-recovery velocity tracking in simulation, and deploy the velocity-tracking policy on a real Unitree G1 robot. The distillation process preserves the tracking behavior of the expert, while the resulting HMP can be reused without retraining as the action interface for different downstream locomotion policies. The learned HMP reveals an interpretable codebook structure in which the number of active RVQ stages modulates the available gait patterns. We further show that training the codebook with the rotation trick improves latent organization and reduces downstream falls compared with a standard straight-through estimator.
Humanoid whole-body controllers can now track a diverse set of dynamic motions, but they are typically trained offline and then frozen, so teaching such a controller a new skill tends to erode the skills it already mastered. We study continual learning for humanoid whole-body motion, where a single controller must acquire skills from a sequential task stream without revisiting past data. We introduce Similarity-guided LoRA-PNN, a progressive neural network (PNN) policy that prevents catastrophic forgetting by construction while reusing knowledge across skills through lightweight low-rank adaptation. A two-level motion-similarity measure, built from dynamic time warping aggregated by optimal transport, decides which prior skill to build on and how much new capacity to allocate, yielding strong forward transfer and large efficiency gains. Across six sequentially learned skill categories, our similarity-guided LoRA policy attains the best forward transfer (0.125 vs. 0.079) and the highest average accuracy among all methods, while saving up to 94.5% of trainable parameters and 40.8% of training time. The resulting controller reaches 96.13% sim-to-sim transfer and is deployed on a physical Unitree G1. Our code is available at https://anonymous.4open.science/r/continual-humanoid-learning-35D3.