SearcharxivSearch

arXiv · 2403.10117

Do Visual-Language Grid Maps Capture Latent Semantics?

Abstract

Visual-language models (VLMs) have recently been introduced in robotic mapping using the latent representations, i.e., embeddings, of the VLMs to represent semantics in the map. They allow moving from a limited set of human-created labels toward open-vocabulary scene understanding, which is very useful for robots when operating in complex real-world environments and interacting with humans. While there is anecdotal evidence that maps built this way support downstream tasks, such as navigation, rigorous analysis of the quality of the maps using these embeddings is missing. In this paper, we propose a way to analyze the quality of maps created using VLMs. We investigate two critical properties of map quality: queryability and distinctness. The evaluation of queryability addresses the ability to retrieve information from the embeddings. We investigate intra-map distinctness to study the ability of the embeddings to represent abstract semantic classes and inter-map distinctness to evaluate the generalization properties of the representation. We propose metrics to evaluate these properties and evaluate two state-of-the-art mapping methods, VLMaps and OpenScene, using two encoders, LSeg and OpenSeg, using real-world data from the Matterport3D data set. Our findings show that while 3D features improve queryability, they are not scale invariant, whereas image-based embeddings generalize to multiple map resolutions. This allows the image-based methods to maintain smaller map sizes, which can be crucial for using these methods in real-world deployments. Furthermore, we show that the choice of the encoder has an effect on the results. The results imply that properly thresholding open-vocabulary queries is an open problem.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Matti Pekkanen, Tsvetomila Mihaylova, Francesco Verdoja, Ville Kyrki. 2024-03-15. Do Visual-Language Grid Maps Capture Latent Semantics?. https://doi.org/10.1109/iros60139.2025.11247447

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

IMLE-VLA: Fast Single-Step Action Generation for Vision-Language-Action Policies

Vision-language-action (VLA) policies leverage pretrained vision-language backbones to achieve strong cross-task generalization. A leading design couples this backbone with a dedicated continuous action head trained via diffusion or flow matching. However, such heads rely on iterative multi-step sampling, for example 10 Euler steps in $\pi_{0.5}$. This creates an inference bottleneck that produces stop-and-go movement in the robot and slower task completion. We introduce IMLE-VLA, which replaces the iterative action head with a single-step conditional generator trained via conditional Implicit Maximum Likelihood Estimation (cIMLE). The cIMLE objective promotes multimodal action coverage, avoiding the mode collapse of naive regression heads while eliminating multi-step sampling entirely. When IMLE-VLA is applied to $\pi_{0.5}$, it increases inference frequency 3.67x (55 Hz vs. 15 Hz), enabling up to 11x higher action throughput. On the 40-task LIBERO benchmark, IMLE-VLA achieves the highest average success rate (98.0%) among all baselines while leading in inference frequency. Under the test-time perturbations of LIBERO-plus, IMLE-VLA retains $\pi_{0.5}$'s robustness while other baselines degrade sharply, confirming that the cIMLE head preserves generalization. Real-world experiments on a Franka Emika Panda across four tasks demonstrate smoother motion (2.2x to 3.0x lower jerk) and faster task completion, with IMLE-VLA outperforming $\pi_{0.5}$ on every task and reducing average VLA inference time per episode by 3.9x to 6.6x. Videos and code are available at https://kianhk6.github.io/IMLE-VLA/

cs.RO

ObstaDiff: Generalizable Diffusion Policy Learning via Obstacle-aware Representations

Imitation learning has achieved impressive results in robotic manipulation, yet most existing approaches assume clean backgrounds and lack explicit mechanisms for obstacle-aware motion generation. Extending such policies to cluttered, real-world scenes with unstructured obstacles remains a key generalization challenge. We present ObstaDiff, a decomposed diffusion-policy framework with a lightweight obstacle-aware visual encoder. ObstaDiff extracts a structured target-obstacle-background representation, enabling the downstream alignment policy to generate end-effector trajectories toward a target-centered bottleneck pose while reasoning about surrounding obstacles. We evaluate ObstaDiff on 61 real-robot greenhouse trials per method (366 executions in total). ObstaDiff achieves 75.41% average task success and 8.20% average obstacle collision rate, outperforming representative imitation-learning baselines and improving generalization in cluttered agricultural scenes.

cs.RO

Testing Between the Test Cases: Proving End-to-End Steering in Conditions You Never Drove

AI-based automated vehicle testing is challenging because a model that passes every test condition can still fail in the real world. Formal verification offers a way to directly address this gap. On a simulated highway and an arterial road we trained two small end-to-end steering networks each in CARLA, one on clear conditions alone and one on clear, fog, night and low sun. All four models were driven against a 2.19 ft lane-departure budget. Without driving again, we used bound propagation, a formal method that reads the trained weights, to compute how far steering can drift at every disturbance strength between two captured images. One calculation covers more than a campaign could drive: on the arterial it spans 133 poses, where ten intensities each would be 10^133 combinations, in minutes on one GPU. Not only did formal verification find conditions that broke the clear-trained policy without simulation testing, it provided some preliminary evidence for potential failures between the test cases. Our overall conclusion is that formal verification is a viable complement to simulation, and could be adopted as a part of verification and validation for automated driving.

cs.RO