We fine-tuned a separate π0.5 policy for each of the five tasks in the MetaFine Open Competition, with a task-specific training mixture and number of actions executed per prediction. Training started from the official demonstrations and expert procedures. Local evaluation exposed recurring grasping, pushing, and insertion failures. We addressed them by revising the demonstrated motions and by adding expert continuations from states the policy reached, while keeping nominal demonstrations in training. Checkpoints were compared on every instruction, so that a gain on one instruction could not hide a loss on another. Our submission, MAI, ranked first overall with a score of 96.66.
Figures & tables
Task
Observed behavior
Training approach
Evaluation checks
T1
Part-dependent failures; slips as lifting begins
Part-specific grasps; gradual lift during closure
Cap and body scored separately
T2
All nominal cases succeed; two perturbation failures
Balanced sources and motion directions
All directions; visual perturbations
T3
Missed contact and partial pushes at difficult angles
Complete pushes; recovery across approach angles
Both switch colors; reserve scene set
T4
Empty grasps near close neighbors
Neighbor clearance and empty-grasp recovery
All colors; standard and crowded scenes
T5
Letter o released offset or unseated
Continuous plans with consistent grasps; full seating
All four letters; two scene sets
Table 1: Observed behavior, training approach, and evaluation checks for each task.
T1
T2
T3
T4
T5
Overall
P
86.25
98.89
98.54
99.31
94.37
95.47
U
90.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
96.25
97.25
B
90.00
100.00
100.00
100.00
96.25
97.25
S
88.75
99.63
99.51
99.77
95.62
96.66
Table 2: Official results (%). Overall averages the five tasks.
Task
Evaluation scope
Reference
Selected
T1
80 scenes; n=3,200
88.95
93.39
T2
20 scenes; n=480
—
100.00
T3
120 scenes, four inference seeds; n=7,680
99.22
99.47
T4
80 scenes; n=1,280
99.81
99.97
T5
80 development scenes; n=880
95.07
97.95
Separate 80 scenes; n=880
93.26
97.05
Table 3: Local composite scores S (%): Selected denotes the final submitted policy; Reference denotes a preceding task-specific policy evaluated on the same scene set. T2 was trained from the base model; “—” means no reference comparison is reported. n counts episodes per model. For T2, S follows the public competition configuration, which evaluates P on the left instruction; the sweep also covers right and forward.
Vision-language action (VLA) policies often report strong manipulation benchmark performance with relatively few demonstrations, but it remains unclear whether this reflects robust language-to-object grounding or reliance on object--location correlations that do not transfer beyond the training distribution. We present a controlled multi-object picking study that progressively increases object placement variability up to full workspace randomization and evaluates held-out object--location pairings that break familiar associations without increasing spatial difficulty. Across these stress tests and data scaling, we find that for representative VLA policies, including SmolVLA and π0.5, execution of the manipulation primitive remains substantially more reliable than instruction-conditioned task success in harder regimes, suggesting that manipulation skill acquisition is decoupled from instruction following. We recommend augmenting manipulation benchmarks with task ladders and decomposed metrics that separately measure primitive execution and instruction-conditioned success to better diagnose instruction-grounded generalization.
David Emukpere, Romain Deffayet, Jean-Michel Renders
Naver Labs Europe, 6 Chem. de Maupertuis, Meylan, France.
Extending a vision-language-action (VLA) policy to a new task typically requires task-specific teleoperated demonstrations and per-task fine-tuning, making adaptation costly in both data collection and compute. In this paper, we show that this target-side per-task adaptation cost can be replaced by retrieval. Our retrieval-augmented policy is trained once on paired demonstrations from the target embodiment (query) and a cheaper embodiment (pool, e.g., human-hand video), then frozen. New tasks are added at deployment by appending pool-side demonstrations to a retrieval pool. The frozen policy conditions on retrieved trajectories at every control step, so new tasks are absorbed by indexing data rather than updating parameters. Fine-tuning is needed only to take on a new, unseen embodiment, not for each new task. We show that retrieval improves policies beyond a specific backbone, including standard VLA policies, but its effect is especially pronounced in Cosmos Policy, a video-generation-based world-action model (WAM). In this setting, retrieval supplies coarse task progression, while the WAM's future-image objective provides an additional visual consistency signal that strengthens the retrieval-conditioned actions. On PushT, we study how retrieval provides a reusable high-level motion prior for cross-embodiment generalization to unseen goal angles, while on RoboTwin 2.0 our method outperforms cross-embodiment baselines on unseen tasks, and we additionally demonstrate the method on a real robot.
Vision-Language-Action (VLA) policies are typically adapted using successful demonstrations, which provide direct action supervision but rarely cover failure-prone states. Deployment failures expose these states, yet lack the corrective actions needed for conventional supervised learning. We propose FailPatch, a failure-driven residual patching framework that decouples action supervision from execution-reliability supervision. Successful demonstrations ground how the policy should act, while deployment trajectories indicate when its behavior becomes unreliable. We further observe that action hidden representations exhibit clear linear separability between reliable and failure-associated states while directly conditioning action generation. Building on these insights, FailPatch introduces a Null-gated Residual Expert Bank into the action hidden space of a frozen VLA policy. A unified Preserve--Redirect--Trust objective retains the original policy in reliable states, selects residual experts in failure-associated states and redirects representations from failure regions toward success-associated regions under bounded intervention. With only 0.52% trainable parameters, FailPatch improves success rates by 11.0 percentage points on four long-horizon RoboTwin tasks under clean evaluation, 9.5 percentage points under clean-to-random generalization, and 16.7 percentage points over the baseline across three real-world tasks. Project and code: https://github.com/yupeng-2003/FailPatch.
Peng Yu, Jiacheng Wang, Ziheng Zhang +6
Xi’an Jiaotong University · Dexmal · Nanjing University