Robot policy evaluation often relies on a binary success signal for task completion. In real-world deployment, however, desired execution behaviors are also defined by quality attributes such as execution speed and motion smoothness, which need to be dynamically controlled according to task requirements. To address this, we introduce Quality-Controllable Policy (QCP), a robot policy that enables inference-time control over both individual quality attributes and their combinations. To extend the controllable quality range beyond initial demonstrations, we further propose an iterative hindsight relabeling loop: QCP collects online rollouts under target quality labels, adds successful trajectories to the dataset, relabels the accumulated trajectories in hindsight according to their measured quality, and fine-tunes the policy. Experiments on Robomimic and RoboEval demonstrate that QCP consistently improves both task execution quality and success rates across iterations, producing successful rollouts that exceed the quality of the initial demonstrations. Finally, we validate QCP on real-world manipulation tasks, where controlling speed increases throughput in conveyor operations and controlling transport stability improves success when carrying wine glasses, demonstrating that quality-controllable policies yield practical gains in physical deployment.
Figures & tables
Figure 1: Overview of QCP and iterative hindsight relabeling. Left: QCP controls execution quality at inference time through conditioning on quantized quality tokens. Right: Iterative hindsight relabeling shifts the quality distribution of successful rollouts toward higher quality, expanding the controllable range beyond the initial demonstrations.
Figure 2: Comparison of QCP with BC baselines (BC filter , BC acc ) and behavioral quality learning methods (SORL, SCIQL) across iterations on (a) Robomimic and (b) RoboEval. Each plot shows task success rate against a quality metric, with the y-axis oriented so that higher is better. Darker and larger markers correspond to later iterations. QCP improves quality and task success together more effectively than the baselines. Results are averaged over three random seeds.
Sq+Speed
Sq+Smoothness
Tr+Speed
Tr+Smoothness
Pack+Speed
Pack+JPL
Book+Speed
Book+JPL
Method
SR
Speed
SR
Smoothness
SR
Speed
SR
Smoothness
SR
Speed
SR
JPL
SR
Speed
SR
JPL
(%)
(steps)
(%)
( ×10−3 )
(%)
(steps)
(%)
( ×10−3 )
(%)
(s)
(%)
(rad)
(%)
(s)
(%)
(rad)
QCP (ours)
82.2
120.3
79.7
8.5
22.2
432.8
12.3
22.2
45.8
4.82
35.3
6.42
47.0
2.43
37.9
4.63
SORL
53.2
156.0
48.4
11.5
4.6
466.8
5.7
34.9
39.7
5.64
41.8
7.11
48.9
3.37
41.4
5.15
SCIQL
68.7
206.5
83.0
12.8
10.6
540.8
7.9
47.2
39.9
9.24
37.4
9.06
48.4
4.75
47.0
6.40
DSRL
37.0
208.8
43.0
46.9
4.0
549.5
7.0
79.4
60.7
6.35
50.7
66.05
0.0
—
0.0
—
Table 1: QCP versus RL baselines. Results at the final iteration (iteration 5, i.e., after five rounds of rollout collection) are averaged across three random seeds. Higher success rates and lower quality metric values are better.
Figure 3: Quality achieved at each requested bin across iterations on Robomimic Square. The ordering of the bins is preserved while the whole range moves toward higher quality (arrows). Mean ± one standard deviation over three seeds.
Figure 4: Quality distributions across iterations. Starting from the initial demonstration distribution, QCP shifts the quality distribution of successful rollouts toward higher quality, extending beyond the initial demonstration range. Arrows point toward higher quality.
Figure 5: QCP jointly adjusts execution speed and lift amplitude in the requested directions over iterations.
Figure 6: Joint improvement of six quality attributes on RoboEval. Final QCP and BC acc policies are compared with initial BC on four tasks. Each axis shows the initial BC score divided by the method’s score, so the initial BC polygon lies on the 1× ring and outward indicates better quality. Success rates of initial BC and final QCP are shown above each task.
Figure 7: Quality control on real robots. QCP achieves higher task success than BC baselines while (a) reducing the tray tilt angle in wine serving and (b) increasing end-effector speed in conveyor work. Values are means over three seeds; error bars and the shaded band around BC denote ± 1 standard deviation.
Figure 9
Appendix figures & tables5 assets
Supplementary material from the paper’s appendix.
Appendix
Main results (Figs. 2 , 4 , Tab. 1 )
Fig. 3
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 9
Fig. 9
Square
Transport
RoboEval
Square
Square
RoboEval
Square
Square
Number of iterations
6
6
6
10
10
7
6
7
Steps per iteration
100k
100k
30k
30k
30k
30k
30k
30k
Episode limit (steps)
400
700
400
400
800
400
800
400
Action chunk
6 / 4
10 / 8
10 / 8
10 / 8
10 / 8
10 / 8
10 / 8
10 / 8
Appendix
Table 2: Per-experiment settings. Steps are gradient steps per iteration. “Number of iterations” counts iterations including iteration 0, which is trained on the demonstrations alone. The action chunk is written as chunk length / executed steps.
SORL
SCIQL
β
Speed
Smoothness
Speed
Smoothness
0
34.0 ± 3.5 / 213.8 ± 17.0
36.7 ± 5.3 / 0.0118 ± 0.0010
77.1 ± 9.0 / 251.2 ± 25.6
72.3 ± 6.0 / 0.0205 ± 0.0017
1
39.0 ± 6.0 / 206.5 ± 18.8
40.3 ± 8.3 / 0.0114 ± 0.0012
78.0 ± 8.7 / 231.0 ± 26.7
79.3 ± 6.2 / 0.0187 ± 0.0018
2
45.0 ± 9.5 / 189.4 ± 9.8
51.3 ± 3.7 / 0.0126 ± 0.0007
74.7 ± 4.3 / 218.9 ± 18.6
79.7 ± 9.8 / 0.0176 ± 0.0018
3
53.2 ± 7.8 / 156.0 ± 18.1
48.4 ± 6.5 / 0.0115 ± 0.0010
68.7 ± 5.2 / 206.5 ± 23.2
83.0 ± 6.0 / 0.0128 ± 0.0007
4
41.7 ± 5.7 / 188.1 ± 18.0
43.3 ± 4.9 / 0.0142 ± 0.0008
70.7 ± 8.4 / 212.5 ± 14.6
85.0 ± 4.7 / 0.0185 ± 0.0022
Appendix
Table 3: Coefficient sweep on Robomimic Square. Each cell is success rate (%) / quality of successful episodes (steps to success for Speed, action jerk for Smoothness; lower is better), mean ± standard deviation over three seeds. Left: SORL and SCIQL over the advantage temperature β . Right: DSRL and EXPO over the quality reward weight λ . Bold rows are the settings used in the main results ( β=3 , λ=4 ) and reproduce Table 1 .
Task
Conditioned
Dropped (reason)
Lift Pot
JPL, OPL, CT, MJJ, BAVD, BGVD
CPL (a fixed vertical lift leaves little Cartesian path to vary), MCJ (redundant with MJJ)
Stack
CPL, JPL, CT, OPL, MJJ, MCJ
BAVD (one-arm task, equal arm velocities are not a quality), BGVD (large by design of the task)
Handover
CPL, OPL, MJJ, MCJ, BAVD, BGVD
CT (in conflict with the smoothness attributes), JPL (redundant with CPL and OPL)
Valve
JPL, OPL, CT, MJJ, BAVD, BGVD
MCJ (nearly constant for a wrist rotation), CPL (path fixed by the valve geometry)
Appendix
Table 4: Conditioned attributes per task. The two dropped attributes and the reason.
Lift Pot
SR
JPL
OPL
CT
MJJ
BAVD
BGVD
Initial BC
0.92 ± 0.01
4.37 ± 0.06
3.65 ± 0.04
2.04 ± 0.02
228.8 ± 2.6
0.418 ± 0.004
0.0052 ± 0.0003
\textscBCacc
0.99 ± 0.00
3.59 ± 0.07
3.08 ± 0.06
1.95 ± 0.03
176.6 ± 2.6
0.278 ± 0.015
0.0027 ± 0.0003
QCP
1.00 ± 0.00
2.82 ± 0.09
1.98 ± 0.09
1.72 ± 0.00
130.5 ± 6.4
0.173 ± 0.019
0.0022 ± 0.0002
Stack
SR
CPL
JPL
CT
OPL
MJJ
MCJ
Initial BC
0.46 ± 0.02
1.98 ± 0.03
8.16 ± 0.24
6.64 ± 0.05
5.72 ± 0.11
153.2 ± 3.0
39.2 ± 0.6
\textscBCacc
0.46 ± 0.02
1.68 ± 0.05
7.59 ± 0.22
8.62 ± 0.86
5.05 ± 0.09
80.4 ± 6.7
19.2 ± 1.2
Appendix
Table 5: Six-attribute quality on RoboEval. Numerical values of Figure 6 : success rate and the six conditioned attributes at iteration 6 for QCP and \textscBCacc , and for the initial BC. Mean ± standard deviation over seeds; lower is better for every attribute; units as in Appendix A .
Figure 10: Quality labels for shorter segments. Success rate versus mean end-effector (EEF) displacement per step over successful rollouts on Square and Transport. We compare complete trajectory labels (QCP), segment labels, hybrid labels, and 10% filtered BC over iterations 0–9; darker points indicate later iterations. Transport 10% filtered BC has no successful rollouts, so its quality values are undefined and omitted.
Behaviour Cloning (BC) has driven remarkable progress in robot manipulation, yet it is fundamentally limited by its inability to self-improve: a policy that fails cannot learn from that failure without additional human demonstrations. Reinforcement Learning fine-tuning offers a path to self-improvement but has proven difficult to scale to the multi-billion-parameter models underpinning modern robot policies. We propose Q-Planning, which equips a large visuomotor BC policy with a small off-policy Q-function. Because a Q-function estimates value rather than imitates actions, it can be trained on the same successful demonstrations as the BC policy and later absorb both successful and failed deployment rollouts, an asymmetry BC does not have. We exploit this asymmetry to enable value-guided action selection at inference (a single-step Q-weighted average over BC draws) and online self-improvement that fine-tunes only the Q-function, leaving the BC weights untouched. On LIBERO and bimanual RoboTwin, ten iterations of self-improvement lift every benchmark score we tested (LIBERO-10 93% to 99%, RoboTwin 83.8% to 91.4%) and shorten successful episodes on the near-ceiling suites (LIBERO-Object, LIBERO-Goal). On two contact-rich bimanual real-robot tasks, the same loop (BC frozen, no human intervention) improves purely from its own deployment rollouts: stack-cups 40% to 90% and insert-wallet 25% to 80% in five iterations, whereas SFT on successful rollouts alone stalls at 55% and 30%. Under an identical online budget Q-Planning is the only method, among Best-of-N, filtered SFT, IBRL, DSRL, and DAWR, that improves stably from failures without training an auxiliary actor.
Varun Giridhar, Anant Khandelwal, Jeremy A. Collins +2
Robot policies deployed in real environments naturally accumulate mixed-quality experience, including successful executions, partial progress, and failures. Although these rollouts provide valuable information for further learning, directly incorporating them into imitation learning may reinforce undesirable behaviors, while offline reinforcement learning often suffers from unreliable value estimation under sparse rewards and limited data coverage. We consider a practical post-deployment setting where learning relies only on naturally accumulated autonomous rollouts, without additional human corrections or exploratory interaction. To effectively exploit such experience, we propose Predictive Action Chunk Learning (PACL). PACL first learns a predictive chunk-level critic that evaluates temporally extended action sequences and augments temporal difference learning with future latent prediction, providing richer supervision for long-horizon value estimation. The learned critic then converts chunk-level Q-values into discrete quality conditions, which guide a diffusion actor to learn jointly from these mixed-quality experiences without treating all behaviors as equivalent supervision. At inference, the actor generates multiple action chunks and the critic selects the highest valued candidate. Experiments across simulated and real-world robot manipulation tasks show that PACL consistently improves the pretrained policy and outperforms strong imitation learning and offline reinforcement learning baselines.
Yangang Ren, Yujie Yan, Zirui Li +6
School of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 639798 · Chongqing Changan Automobile Co., Ltd, Chongqing 400023, China · Guangzhou Cloudbutterfly Technology Co., Ltd., Guangzhou 510220, China
Evaluating robot policies before deployment typically requires producing new trajectories through real-world execution, simulators, or learned world models. These rollout-based approaches impose infrastructure requirements; simulator and world-model evaluators additionally face prediction errors that can compound over the evaluation horizon. In this paper, we study off-policy evaluation as an alternative to rollout-based robot-policy evaluation methods. Specifically, we introduce RoboFQE, an evaluator that estimates the discounted expected return of a target policy from offline robot trajectories without estimating a behavior-policy density, combining fitted Q-evaluation with a pretrained vision foundation model and learned terminal success annotation to bridge the gap between standard OPE benchmarks and continuous-control visual manipulation. Controlled experiments across simulated and real-world manipulation tasks show that RoboFQE produces accurate discounted-return estimates and preserves policy rankings even on long-horizon manipulation tasks where video world-model evaluators are degraded by autoregressive prediction errors. Ablation experiments show that pretrained vision encoders substantially outperform from-scratch alternatives, particularly on long-horizon tasks, and that learned terminal success annotation enables evaluation without ground-truth reward labels with only slight reduction of accuracy.
Yunfu Deng, Sangwoo Shin, Brahma S. Pavse +1
Department of Computer Sciences, University of Wisconsin–Madison